97. The Commission finds that the facts in this case occurred in a prevailing context of widespread impunity, a situation itself recognized as one of the most serious human rights violations occurring in Guatemala,217 in addition to being one of the most important factors contributing to the persistence of human rights violations, as well as criminal and social violence.218 In that sense, as mentioned above, the facts in this case constitute a series of human rights violations that are also international crimes, including, inter alia, extrajudicial executions and acts of extreme violence against men women and children, forced disappearance of persons, destruction and burning of people's homes and means of subsistence, and forced displacement of the residents of the village of Los Josefinos, all committed as part of a policy designed by those in power with the aim of destroying whole communities. 98. Although the State said that it is had adjusted its domestic law "in accordance with universal guarantees in favor of the rights of the victims in cases of this type," the Commission notes that the laws to which the State broadly refers bear no relation whatsoever to the kind of violations established in this report on merits. 99. That said, as to whether the State of Guatemala opened and carried out a meaningful, impartial, and effective investigation within a reasonable time, the Commission notes, to begin with, that the massacre at the village of Los Josefinos was committed on April 29 and 30, 1982, and that the State, despite being aware of the events, failed to open an investigation ex officio; rather, it was the representatives of the victims who initiated the judicial proceeding by requesting an exhumation of remains for the purpose of gathering evidence in 1996. To date, almost 37 years have passed since the events, and 23 years since the investigation began. In spite of that, the deeds remain in utter impunity since, neither the individuals who planned them, nor their perpetrators have been identified. Furthermore, a thorough identification of the exhumed remains has not been carried out, nor have measures been adopted to establish the whereabouts or remains of the other victims. 100. From the evidence, the IACHR observes that the procedures that have been carried out have basically consisted of compiling declarations and documents, but those efforts have not been steered toward an active search for the truth of what happened. Indeed, there is nothing in the record to suggest a meaningful analysis of the information collected with a view to undertaking further investigative actions or pursuing different lines of inquiry. In addition, the IACHR cannot fail to note—as one of the State's most flagrant breaches of its obligations under Articles 8 and 25—the lack of cooperation with, and active obstruction of, the investigation by the military authorities and even by the judicial authorities, which kept the process inactive for almost 10 years and to some extent allowed its obstruction by the Ministry of Defense. Faced with that obstruction, there is no evidence of any follow-up procedures or activation of coercive mechanisms to ensure timely access to important information for the clarification of the facts. The foregoing not only reflects omissions in the investigation, but demonstrates clear patterns of aiding and abetting that began when the deeds occurred and continue to this day. 101. The IACHR also takes into consideration that in the proceeding, witnesses identified and named possible culprits. Despite that, no effective steps were taken to identify the criminal responsibility of military actors or look in to the participation of upper echelon commanders in the Guatemalan Army or other senior government officials. The State argued that there were still no “compelling grounds” in the proceeding to move forward with an indictment or a dismissal of the case. The Commission finds that if the situation is thus, it can only be precisely because in the 23 years that have elapsed since the investigation began and almost 37 years since the massacre, the investigation of the facts in the domestic jurisdiction in the instant case has been neither meaningful, nor impartial, nor effective. 102. As to the issue of reasonable time, Article 8 (1) of the American Convention establishes as one of the elements of a fair trial that tribunals reach a decision on cases submitted for their consideration within a IACHR, Fifth Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Guatemala, April 6, 2001, par. 55. IACHR, Fifth Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Guatemala, April 6, 2001, par. 57. In the Report, the IACHR made the following appeal to the State: “The Commission exhorts the State to devote priority attention and political will to overcoming the situation of impunity that persists, and reiterates that the State will face responsibility for all violations of human rights that occur until such time as it takes the necessary measures to ensure that justice is administered fairly and effectively.” 217 218 26