thoroughness.” MINUGUA identified irregularities to do with a failure to compare testimony and tampering with evidence. 128. That conclusion is consistent with the findings of the Commission in its 2003 report on Guatemala, in which it highlighted information which suggested that in violent crimes, including forced disappearance, several essentials were missing: technical expertise, determination in compiling evidence, and follow-through to prosecution and punishment on the part of the authorities, prosecutors’ failings and mistakes, which make the work of judges that much more difficult, cause delays in the administration of justice, and can even result in crimes going unpunished.175 The Court has also pronounced on this situation, saying that at that time Guatemala did not have the necessary legal standards, procedures, and measures in place to properly carry out, in cases of suspected disappearance, the initial investigative steps in accordance with international standards.176 ii) Due diligence in pursuing logical lines of inquiry 129. Regarding the duty to investigate, the IACHR has also indicated that the State may be liable for a failure "to order, practice or evaluate evidence" that may be essential for a proper clarification of the facts.177 Thus, the IACHR recalls that the obligation to investigate and punish every act that entails a violation of the rights protected by the Convention requires that not only the direct perpetrators of human rights violations be identified, but also the masterminds.178 130. In addition, the Inter-American Court has held that it is not the task of the organs of the inter-American system to "analyze the hypothesis about perpetrators prepared during the investigation of the events of the ... case and determine individual responsibility, whose definition corresponds to domestic criminal tribunals, but rather evaluate the acts and omission of State agents, pursuant to the evidence submitted by the parties."179 However, in cases that involve the violent death or disappearance of a person, the Commission and the Court have held that the investigation initiated should be carried out in such a manner as guarantee proper analysis of the hypotheses as to responsibility arising from it,180 and, in order to demonstrate the diligence of its inquiries, the State must show that it carried out an immediate, exhaustive and impartial investigation181 in which all possible lines of inquiry have been explored in a bid to identify the perpetrators of the crime with a view to their subsequent prosecution and punishment.182 175 par. 30. IACHR, Justice and Social Inclusion: The Challenges of Democracy in Guatemala, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.118, December 29, 2003, 176 I/A Court H.R., Case of Veliz Franco et al. v. Guatemala. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of May 19, 2014. Series C No. 277, par. 180. 177 I/A Court H.R., The “Street Children” Case (Villagrán Morales et al.) v. Guatemala. Judgment of November 19, 1999. Series C No. 63, par. 230. See also IACHR, Report No. 56/12, Merits (Florentín Gudiel Ramos, Makrina Gudiel Álvarez et al.), Guatemala, March 21, 2012, par. 126; IACHR, Access to Justice for Women Victims of Violence in the Americas, OEA/Ser. L/V/II. doc.68, January 20, 2007, par. 41. 178 IACHR, Report No. 56/12, Merits (Florentín Gudiel Ramos, Makrina Gudiel Álvarez et al.), Guatemala, March 21, 2012, par. 110; IACHR, Report 100/11, Merits (Carlos Antonio Luna López et al.), Honduras, July 22, 2011, par. 188. See, also, IACHR, Report on the Situation of Human Rights Defenders in the Americas, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.124. Doc. 5 rev.1, March 7, 2006, par. 109. 179 Cf. I/A Court H.R., Case of Kawas-Fernández v. Honduras. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of April 3, 2009 Series C No. 196, par. 79, Case of Cantoral-Huamaní and García-Santa Cruz. Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of July 10, 2007. Series C No. 167, par. 87. 180 I/A Court H.R., Case of Kawas-Fernández v. Honduras. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of April 3, 2009. Series C No. 196, par. 112. 181 IACHR, Report on Merits No. 55/97, Juan Carlos Abella et al. (Argentina), November 18, 1997, par. 412. 182IACHR, Report No. 25/09, Merits (Sebastião Camargo Filho) Brazil, March 19, 2009, par. 109. See, too, IACHR, Access to Justice for Women Victims of Violence in the Americas, OEA/Ser. L/V/II. doc.68, January 20, 2007, par. 41; I/A Court H.R., Case of GonzalezMedina and Family v. Dominican Republic. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of February 27, 2012, Series C No. 240, par. 115. See, also, IACHR, Report No. 111/09, Case 11.324, Merits, Narciso González Medina, Dominican Republic, November 10, 2009, par. 240. 27