85. According to the representative, and as can be seen from what follows, the judicial proceedings were reopened and the case continued. It should be recalled that, as indicated (supra para. 44), in 2011 the Executive Branch revoked the administrative acts and the communications issued in application of Article 3 of the Expiry Law (supra para. 40). 86. According to the Special Prosecutor’s Report of December 4, 2020, when the document was being prepared “the investigation regarding the case was very advanced.” It stated that “the place and the circumstances in which the victim was detained, transferred and then disappeared have been verified.” It also indicated that “the officers who were part of S2 (intelligence) unit of the military, as well as those belonging to the [Coordinating Body of Anti-subversive Operations] at that time had been identified” and that “some of them have died.” The Special Prosecutor averred that “the Office of the Prosecutor still had not been able to make a decision because appeals of unconstitutionality and prescription filed by indicted persons were pending.105 In his oral statement before the Court on June 16, 2021 (supra paras. 8 and 27), the Special Prosecutor stated that the situation had not changed. 87. This coincides with a judicial report of July 6, 2021, which states that “at a lower court,” the Public Ministry requested the appearance of 10 soldiers “who were being investigated,”106 and that another two individuals, M.C. and H.L., were also “involved.” Argentina had been requested to extradite M.C., but at the time of the report that country had not resolved the issue. Seven of the first 10 soldiers presented objections of prescription, as did H.L., but those appeals had not been resolved at the time of the document.107 C.3 Regarding the disappearance of Óscar Tassino Asteazu and the investigation into it C.3.1. Facts 88. Disnarda Flores denounced that, at 10 p.m. on July 19, 1977, three individuals dressed as civilians arrived at 6632 Máximo Tajes St. and identified themselves as members of the Joint Forces. She stated that they demanded that the persons present remain until her husband, Óscar Tassino Asteazu, arrived. She indicated that when he appeared an hour later, he was violently pushed into the house, deprived of his possessions and taken into one of the bedrooms where he was beaten. She also manifested that at 9:30 the next morning he was taken from there with his face covered and while being beaten. She subsequently added that Mr. Tassino Asteazu had been seen in a clandestine center of detention by people who stated that he was subjected to “horrific forms of torture."108 Judicial authorities were aware of the same information.109 Undated Report of the Special Prosecutor. The document was annexed to the answering brief of the State, which was presented to the Inter-American Court on December 4, 2020 (supra, para. 7). 105 106 It concerns the following persons: W.B., P.F., V.V., R.E., G.C., J.S., E.R., M.A., J.P.A. and A.O. 107 Report of the Twenty-sixth Criminal Court of July 6, 2021 (evidence file, fs. 7473 to 7477). Complaint of Disnarda Flores de Tassino regarding the disappearance of Mr. Tassino Asteazu (evidence file, annex 3(1) to the Merits Report, fs. 970 to 982). 108 109 Cf. Proceedings 614/2021, of June 23, 2021 (evidence file, fs. 7486 to 7523). 26