4 19. By note of July 19, 1983, the Government responded to this communication by pointing out that "the competent national authorities are investigating the case and as soon as specific and objective data are available, they will be forwarded to the Commission." 20. At its 61st Session, the Commission adopted Resolution 32/83 of October 4, 1983, whose operative parts read as follows: 1. By application of Article 39 of the Regulations, to presume as true the allegations contained in the communication of October 9, 1982, concerning the detention and possible disappearance of Saul Godínez Cruz in the Republic of Honduras. 2. To point out to the Government of Honduras that such acts are most serious violations of the right to life (Art. 4) and the right to personal liberty (Art. 7) of the American Convention on Human Rights. 3. To recommend to the Government of Honduras: (a) that it order a thorough and impartial investigation to determine who is responsible for the acts denounced; (b) that it punish those responsible in accordance with Honduran law; and (c) that it inform the Commission within 60 days, especially about the measures taken to carry out these recommendations. 4. If the Government of Honduras does not submit its observations within the time limit set out in paragraph 3 supra, the Commission shall include this Resolution in its Annual Report to the General Assembly pursuant to Article 59(g) of its Regulations. 21. On December 1, 1983 the Government requested reconsideration of Resolution 32/83 on the grounds that a writ of habeas corpus (exhibición personal), brought on behalf of Saul Godínez Gómez on August 17, 1982, had been denied because the applicant did not complete the procedure in a timely fashion and that another writ, brought on behalf of Saul Godínez Cruz and others on July 4, 1983, was still pending on the date that the Government requested the reconsideration. The Government included information received from security officials on the impossibility of determining the whereabouts of Saúl Godínez Cruz. It also pointed out that Police Sergeant Félix Pedro García Rodríguez, of Monjarás de Choluteca had declared that Godínez was in Cuba, from whence he planned to go to Nicaragua before returning to Honduras. 22. In his response of February 15, 1984, the petitioner admitted that the writ of habeas corpus filed on August 17, 1982 had not been pursued "because they denied holding anybody by the name of Saul Godínez Gómez and the investigating judge fell for that trick." The petitioner also forwarded a written statement by someone who claimed to have seen Saul Godínez Cruz and other prisoners in the custody of Honduran authorities on July 27, 1983, at the Central Penitentiary of Tegucigalpa. 23. By note of May 29, 1984, the Commission informed the Government that it had decided "to reconsider Resolution 32/83 and to continue the study of the case." The Commission also asked the Government to provide information on the exhaustion of domestic legal remedies and on other matters relevant to the case. The Commission reiterated this request of January 29, 1985. 24. On March 1, 1985, the Government asked the Commission to postpone consideration of this case because it had set up an "Investigatory Commission" to study the matter. The Commission granted the Government thirty days in which to present the information requested.