paras. 77 and 82).92 Given the State’s broad acknowledgment of responsibility and the nature and scope of the agreement in favor of the victim’s family, the Court ratifies the agreement and considers the daughter and wife of Mr. Santiago Sánchez Silvestre as beneficiaries of the reparation measures set out in the friendly settlement agreement. B) Obligation to investigate acts of torture 69. In the friendly settlement agreement, the section on “guarantees of non-repetition” included the State’s obligation to investigate “acts constituting torture to the detriment of the victims”. In this regard, the following clarifications were made in the agreement: i) concerning “the State’s obligation to investigate and punish,” the State agreed to “[…] diligently conduct and complete, through the Attorney General’s Office of the Republic, all investigations and measures necessary to establish responsibility and, where appropriate, to punish the commission of the crime of torture,” including “actions and omissions that were committed to the detriment of the victims and that resulted in the Mexican State’s international responsibility.” In addition, “pursuant to this obligation […] the State should remove all obstacles, de facto y de jure, that perpetuate impunity;” ii) regarding “access to the investigation and the victims’ participation […] in the prosecution process, the State recognize[d] their sovereign right to access and consult, on their own behalf or through representatives, the records of the investigation conducted into the crime of torture, in order to assist the Federal Prosecutor’s Office.” It further indicated that “[t]his right could be exercised in other criminal proceedings carried out as part of the full inquiry into the facts of this case.” To accomplish this, the parties “will meet as often as is necessary with the Federal Prosecutor’s Office in order to raise issues and make observations related to the investigation of the case;” iii) on the “facts related to the criminal investigation,” it was pointed out that “in order to continue with the investigation of the facts of the case, without prejudging the probable responsibility of the persons investigated, of those who might be found to be involved, as well as of those who might be criminally or administratively sanctioned for the actions related to the crime committed to the detriment of the victims, the State recognizes that the Federal Public Prosecutor’s Office must consider the factual basis acknowledged in the Agreement,” and iv) as regards the “obligation to investigate ex officio,” the State recognize[d] that the investigations must be conducted in accordance with all the obligations established in the Constitution of the United States of Mexico […] and in the international treaties to which the Mexican State is a Party.” 70. The Court appreciates the fact that in the agreement the State expressly recognized the importance of fulfilling its obligation to investigate the facts, identify, prosecute and, if necessary, punish with due diligence, while guaranteeing the victims’ right to have access to and participate in the criminal proceedings. Furthermore, the Court emphasizes stresses the significance of specifying the need to consider the facts acknowledged by the State in this case, and that the investigation be carried out in accordance with the obligations established both in its Constitution and in the international treaties to which Mexico is a party. In this regard, this Court stresses the particular importance of the American Convention and the Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture. 92 The agreement states that the measures awarded “in good faith” “consider that prior to the proceedings before the C[omission] the families of [Messrs. García Cruz and Sánchez Silvestre] were not claimed or acknowledged as victims […].” 22