remains of José Luis lbsen [might] be found.” Thus, on October 22, 2012, a site in the “La Madre” cemetery in Santa Cruz was located and cordoned off in order to exhume osseous remains that could correspond to José Luis lbsen Peña. Rebeca Ibsen Castro and Martha Castro Mendoza, next of kin of the victim, were present during this action. Lastly, in a brief of February 25, 2013, the State indicated that the osseous remains exhumed on that occasion “were sent to the Institute of Forensic Investigations of La Paz, for the corresponding expert appraisal and DNA tests, […] the results of which would be duly forwarded to the [Inter-American] Court.” 15. The representatives indicated that the osseous remains exhumed in the “La Madre” clandestine cemetery of Santa Cruz had been subjected to “evident mishandling, public exhibition […] in the hall of the Prosecutor’s Office of the District of Santa Cruz, and failure to transfer and identify them appropriately […].” They also stated that the CIEDEF “has not been functioning since January 2012 owing to administrative decisions [of …] the Minister of Justice,” so that “the exhumations performed in October 2012 in the La Madre cemetery [… were] conducted based exclusively on the steps taken and the investigations carried out by the Ibsen family.” However, “more than five months after the exhumations had been performed, to date the [… corresponding] DNA tests have not been carried out.” 16. The Commission “observe[d] with concern the absence of specific progress in complying with this measure of reparation.” It indicated that “[o]n previous occasions […], it had assessed the creation of the CIEDEF and the strategy designed by the State to search for victims of forced disappearance during the military dictatorships. However, [… it] consider[ed] that the State must provide specific information on the effects of this strategy in this specific case.” In addition, the Commission indicated that it was “a matter of concern that, more than five years after the exhumations had been performed in the La Cuchilla cemetery, it was only in 2011 had an expert in forensic anthropology been appointed.” Thus, it considered “that the necessary diligence and expediency must be applied” in order to implement this measure of reparation, and that “different alternatives for conducting the search should be explored with the necessary mechanisms for coordination between the various authorities involved.” Lastly, the Commission “hope[d] that the State would overcome the problems that have complicated progress in this matter and that it would continue providing information on the results obtained.” 17. First, the Court appreciates that, as ordered in the Judgment,15 the State conducted the corresponding tests to rule out the possibility that the remains found in the “La Cuchilla” cemetery (supra considering paragraphs 14 and 16) could correspond to José Luis Ibsen Peña.16 However, the Court underscores that Mr. Ibsen Peña disappeared 40 years ago and his whereabouts are still unknown. Thus, the Court reiterates that it is extremely important for the next of kin of the disappeared victim to clarify his final fate, because this would alleviate the anguish and suffering caused by the uncertainty about his whereabouts.17 Consequently, the Court finds it necessary that Bolivia continue to conduct an effective search for the whereabouts of Mr. Ibsen Peña and therefore urges the State to carry out the pertinent tests to establish, as soon as possible, whether the remains found in the “La Madre” cemetery (supra considering paragraphs 14 and 15) correspond to him. The Court also asks the State to forward detailed and updated information on all the measures it has                                                              15 Cf. Case of Ibsen Cárdenas and Ibsen Peña v. Bolivia. Judgment of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of September 1, 2010. Series C No. 217, para. 237. 16 Cf. Expert report of the Institute of Forensic Investigations, signed by Omar Rocabado Calizaya, dated September 23, 2011 (file on monitoring compliance, tome II, folio 1101). 17 Cf. Case of Ibsen Cárdenas and Ibsen Peña v. Bolivia. Judgment of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of September 1, 2010. Series C No. 217, paras. 107, 214 and 242. 7