7 analyses of human remains be performed by competent professionals and using the most appropriate procedures.17 19. That investigators probing reports or evidence of extrajudicial executions must be independent. This requires not only hierarchical or institutional independence, but also actual independence from any institution or individual that may come under investigation.18 20. That, over fifteen years after the incidents took place and four years after the entry of the Judgment on the merits, the violations found in the instant case remain unpunished. This situation leads the Court to reiterate that Guatemala has clear obligations under the American Convention, specifically in relation to Articles 67 and 68 thereof and, therefore, the State must promptly and fully comply with its obligation to investigate the facts of this case. 21. That, despite the request that the Court made to the State in the Order of July 10, 2007 (supra Having Seen clause No. 2), reiterated by the Order of the President of November 18, 2008 (supra Having Seen clause No. 3) as well as by the judges during the private hearing, and by means of two letter from the Secretariat (supra Having Seen clause No. 5), the State has failed to comply with its obligation to provide detailed information regarding compliance with this obligation. Therefore, the Court requests the State to submit a detailed report on the measures taken to investigate the facts of this case. In that regard, dates and specific results must be provided regarding the steps taken in order to identify all those responsible for the crimes. The next of kin of the victims shall have full access to and be allowed to participate at all stages of the proceeding, in accordance with domestic laws and the American Convention.19 Especially, the State must inform the Court of the number and nature of the procedural steps being followed to investigate the systematic patterns underlying this extrajudicial execution. * * * 22. That, with regard to the State’s duty to remove all de facto and de jure obstacles and mechanisms that perpetuate impunity in the case, grant the witnesses, judicial authorities, prosecutors, other judicial agents and the next of kin of the victims sufficient guarantees of security, and use all possible measures to advance the proceeding (second operative paragraph of the Judgment), the State informed the Court of Decree No. 70-96 “Law on the Protection of Persons Participating in Criminal Proceedings and Persons engaged in the Administration of Criminal Justice”, passed by Congress, the main purpose of which is to provide protection to officers and employees of the Judiciary, civil security forces and the Attorney General’s Office, as well as to lay and expert witnesses, consultants, complainants and other individuals that are at risk due to their participation in criminal proceedings. [To that end], the Protection Service 17 Cf. Case of Juan Humberto Sánchez, supra note 16, paras. 127 and 132; Case of Zambrano-Vélez et al. v. Ecuador, supra note 16, para. 121; Case of the “Street Children” (Villagrán-Morales et al.) v. Guatemala, supra note 5, Considering clause No. 24, and Case of Kawas-Fernández v. Honduras, supra note 15, para. 102. 18 Cf. Case of Zambrano-Vélez et al. v. Ecuador, supra note 16, para. 122, and Case of the “Street Children” (Villagrán-Morales et al.) v. Guatemala, supra note 5, Considering clause No. 25. 19 Cf. Case of Caracazo v. Venezuela. Reparations and Costs. Judgment of August 29, 2002. Series C No. 95, para. 118; Case of Kawas-Fernández, supra note 15, para. 194, and Case of Baldeón-García v. Peru. Monitoring Compliance with Judgment. Order of the Court of April 3, 2009, Considering clause No. 14.