18. In the case of Santiago Antezana Cueto, the petitioners indicated that he was detained on May 7, 1984, along with his uncle Máximo Antezana Espeza, by army troops in the District of Anta, in the province of Acobamba, department of Huancavelica, when he was attending funeral services for his father. They indicated that both were taken to a counterinsurgency base in the area, where both had been tortured and required to dig graves. The petitioners stated that there is no information about the fate or whereabouts of Santiago Antezana since May 14, 1984, date on which his uncle was released. They added that after investigating what had happened, the next of kin of the alleged victim found out that, since December 1983, seven other persons had been confined in the same counterinsurgency base and had afterwards disappeared. They reported that, on September 11, 1993, Mr. Máximo Antezana Espeza was killed in the province of Chanchamayo, department of Junín, allegedly in retaliation for having reported the arbitrary detentions, torture, and disappearances. The petitioners indicated that, 30 years after the incidents, there are not even any charges being brought by the Public Prosecutor’s Office against those possibly responsible. They also asserted that, in the national proceedings, there is only Santiago Antezana Cueto as victim but not the other victims who have been reported. 19. In the case of Néstor Rojas Medina, the petitioners indicated that, on November 9, 1990, there was a raid by members of the Shining Path in the village of Juan Santos Atahualpa, and that they set the house of Nestor’s mother on fire and killed the school principal, who was his cousin. They added that, at that same time, about 100 families of Juan Santos Atahualpa de Tocache, of Alto Huallaga, department of San Martín de Porres, were forced to abandon their land and escape because of terrorist violence. They indicated that, sometime later, because of need for food, shelter, education, and health, Néstor Rojas Medina decided to go back to the village to pick up some things they had left behind and withdraw savings that his mother had in the bank. The petitioners asserted that it was then that Néstor Rojas Medina was detained and made to disappear, on January 26, 1991, by the National Police Force with the military base in the city of Tocache, as a result of a random roundup operation. The petitioners reported that, since that date, nothing is known about Nestor’s whereabouts, who was a 20-year-old student majoring in radio broadcasting and working as a trainee at the radio broadcasting company Radiodifusión RBC in Lima. 20. In the case of Cory Clodolia Tenicela Tello, the petitioners indicated that, on October 2, 1992, Cory Clodolia Tenicela Tello, retailer and student at the National University of the Center of Peru (Universidad Nacional del Centro del Perú—UNCP), was detained in the city of Huancayo, department of Junín, by troops of the Peruvian Army because she was supposedly a sympathizer of the Shining Path, and since then there is no knowledge about her whereabouts. They added that Peru’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission (Comisión de la Verdad y Reconciliación—CVR) considered her as a missing person but even then, 20 years later, the truth and those responsible have not been found. B. Position of the state 21. The state indicated that the country went through a period of internal political violence that makes it possible to understand the complexities of a “system looking for authentic investigations.” It reported that, on the basis of that perspective, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (CVR) was established to find mechanisms that would guarantee an independent and impartial judiciary, an effective separation of the branches of government, and reconciliation between citizens and government. It also indicated that there is a National Human Rights Plan aimed at implementing the cross-cutting dynamics of the above, throughout the structure of government. It asserted that it was the will of the state to investigate human rights crimes, especially those, such as forced disappearance, that are specified as crimes against humanity. It added that, since the judgment issued by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in the Barrios Altos case, the obligation to investigate has become more effectively implemented than in the past. It also pointed out that said judgment indicates that the obligation to investigate is either of means or of behavior and the Peruvian State has not failed to fulfill its obligations because it was unable to produce satisfactory results owing to the complexity of the five cases that are the subject of the present report. 22. The state argued that there was no state responsibility with respect to the alleged detention and supposed forced disappearance of Wilfredo Terrones Silva, Teresa Díaz Aparicio, Santiago Antezana