American Convention, as well as of Article I(b) of the CIDFP, to the detriment of Óscar Iván Tabares Toro, his mother María Elena Toro Torres, his father Óscar de Jesús Tabares, his stepfather Holmar de Jesús Gallego Márquez, and his siblings María Bibiancy Tabares Toro, Jhon Fredy Tabares Giraldo, Leidy Julieth Gallego Toro, and María Isabel Gallego Toro; and c) the insecurity experienced by the victim’s relatives, which led not just to multiple moves but also to exile for Ms. Toro and her daughter. This has torn the family apart, in violation of the victim’s and his family’s rights to personal integrity, protection of the family, freedom of movement and residence, honor, and dignity, as established in Articles 5(1), 17, 22, and 11 of the American Convention. 23. With respect to reparations, the Commission asked that the State redouble its efforts to: (i) accelerate its investigation into the facts, as well as the prosecution and eventual punishment of those responsible for the disappearance of Óscar Tabares; (ii) carry out an effective search plan whose progress and results can be monitored and measured with the due participation of family members and their representatives; (iii) comprehensively make reparation for the consequences of the above-mentioned violations; and (iv) adopt the measures necessary to ensure that these kinds of violations do not happen again. B. Considerations of the Court 24. Pursuant to Articles 62 and 64 of the Rules of Procedure, and in its authority to exercise international judicial oversight of human rights, a matter of international public order, it is the responsibility of this Court to ensure that acknowledgments of responsibility are compatible with the aims of the inter-American system. 6 The Court will analyze below the issues raised by the case under review here. B.1. The facts 25. It follows from the State’s acknowledgment of responsibility that the State has accepted the factual framework of the case described by the Commission in the Merits Report. Because of this, there is no longer any dispute, specifically regarding: a) the forced disappearance of the professional soldier Óscar Iván Tabares Toro on December 28, 1997—involving the direct participation of state agents—while the soldier was encamped with the “Tigre” Company of Anti-guerrilla Battalion 20 of the National Army near the municipality of San Juanito, Meta; b) serviceman Tabares Toro was subject to the authority of the National Army, and in this special situation, the State assumes the role of guarantor; and c) the family members suffered rootlessness and stigmatization after the facts due to the State’s failure to seek justice. 26. Colombia has also acknowledged that state authorities failed to diligently investigate the disappearance within a reasonable period of time, which made it impossible to clarify the events, identify those responsible, and locate Mr. Tabares Toro. B.2. Legal claims 27. It is clear from the State’s acknowledgment of its human rights violations, as well as the observations of the representatives and the Commission, that there is no longer any dispute as to the State’s responsibility for violating the American Convention and the CIDFP as enumerated below, to the detriment of the individuals indicated: Cf. Case of Manuel Cepeda Vargas v. Colombia. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations, and costs. Judgment of May 26, 2010. Series C No. 213, para. 17, and Case of Aguinaga Aillón v. Ecuador. Merits, reparations, and costs. Judgment of January 30, 2023. Series C No. 483, para. 16. 6 6