Commission on Human Rights. He reports that from February 28 1985, when the parents of Renato Ticona filed a criminal complaint and became plaintiffs, until March 10, 2005, the date on which Prosecutor Alave appeared before the Receiving Judge for Preliminary Criminal Proceedings [Juez Instructor Penal Liquidador] to pursue investigations in the case, 20 years and ten days had elapsed without even having completed the investigation, not to mention convicting the material and intellectual perpetrators of the reported crimes. Nor had the necessary efforts been made to find the remains of Renato Ticona Estrada, thereby keeping his next of kin in a perpetual state of anxiety. 19. The petitioner alleges that one of the reasons why the judicial investigation into the violations committed against Renato Ticona Estrada produced no results was the fact that the continuous crime of forced disappearance of persons was not established in Bolivian criminal legislation. 20. By virtue of the facts outlined above, the petitioner contends that the Bolivian State has incurred many violations of the American Convention: right to life (Article 4), right to humane treatment (Article 5), right to personal liberty (Article 7), right to a fair trial (Article 8), right to judicial protection (Article 25), right to participate in government (Article 23), and right to juridical personality (Article 3), all as a result of the detention, acts of torture, and cruel and degrading treatment of Hugo Ticona Estrada and subsequent forced disappearance of Renato Ticona Estrada. The State is also responsible for denial of justice and violation of the mental and moral integrity of Cesar Ticona, Honoria Estrada de Ticona, Hugo Ticona Estrada, Rodo Ticona Estrada, and Betzy Ticona Estrada, all of whom are members of the immediate family of the alleged disappeared victim. 21. As for the requirement of exhaustion of domestic remedies, the petitioner invokes the three exceptions contained in Article 46(2) of the American Convention. He based this argument on the following grounds: the circumstances in which the acts occurred, the lack of judicial clarification, failure to respect the right to a fair trial to act in a reasonable period of time, and an unwarranted delay in the proceedings. 22. As regards the first exception the petitioner cited the IACHR’s 1981 Report on the Status of Human Rights in the Republic of Bolivia, where it concluded: [in] light of the information, facts, and considerations referred to in this report, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights has reached the conclusion that the Government of Bolivia, which took office on July 17, 1980, incurred serious violations of the human rights enshrined in the American Convention on Human Rights. These violations affect (…) © the right to personal liberty; hence, without fulfilling constitutional and legal requirements, such as the order by the competent authority to present charges, hundreds of persons were detained without trial, although some of them have been released. And also because the remedies of habeas corpus and amparo, judicial guarantees of the greatest importance for the protection of human rights, were not effective.7 23. On this point, the petitioner contends that from July 17, 1980 to October 10, 1982, the day on which democracy returned to Bolivia, it was impossible to have recourse to justice to seek protection of human rights in the case of violations committed by the de factogovernment of Luis García Meza. For this reason the complaint filed by the National Commission for Investigation of Forced Disappearances with the regular courts in Bolivia, which led to the opening of criminal proceedings against Roberto Melean, Willy Valdivia Gumucio, René Veizaga Vargas, and Gumersindo Espinoza, was not acted on until April 7, 1983. 24. With regard to the second exception contemplated in Article 46(2)(b) of the Convention, the petitioner alleges that the National Commission for Investigation of Forced Disappearances and the members of the family of Renato Ticona Estrada encountered a series of obstacles in their efforts to pursue criminal proceedings and exhaust judicial remedies. These obstacles 7 IACHR Report on the Status of Human Rights in the Republic of Bolivia, conclusions. 4