(i) ensure that the different organs of the system of justice involved in the case have the necessary human and material resources to perform their tasks in a satisfactory, independent and impartial manner, and that those who take part in the investigation, including victims, witnesses and agents of justice, have adequate guarantees for their safety, 242 and (ii) ensure full access and capacity to act to the members of Mr. Ruiz Fuentes’ family at all stage of the investigations, pursuant to domestic law and the provisions of the American Convention.243 201. Also, in relation to the torture suffered by Mr. Ruiz Fuentes at the time of his arrest on August 6, 1997, the Court determines that the State, pursuant to its domestic law and within six months, must initiate the investigation to clarify the facts that have been alleged and conduct this with due diligence, enabling the victim’s family members to participate directly or through their representatives, and have access to all the actions taken. C. Measures of satisfaction and guarantees of non-repetition c.1 Measures of satisfaction 202. The representatives asked the Court to order the State to publish the judgment in a national newspaper and that access to the judgment be made available on the websites of the Guatemalan Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Presidential Human Rights Commission (COPREDEH), the PNC, the Ministry of the Interior, and the prison system. 203. They also asked that the Court require the State to organize an act to acknowledge responsibility in the presence of the victim’s family, during which it expressly accepted that Mr. Ruíz Fuentes was tortured and executed by agents of the State in the context of a criminal plan aimed at the so-called “selective social cleansing.” 204. The State argued that, at all times, it had acted in keeping with the law and, consequently, rejected any attribution of responsibility by either the Commission or the representatives because they had never proved this responsibility; therefore it opposed publication of the judgment. 205. The Commission did not present any specific arguments in this regard. 206. The Court finds, as it has in other cases,244 that, within six months of notification of this judgment, the State must publish: (a) the official summary of this judgment prepared by the Court, once, in the Official Gazette in an adequate and legible font; (b) the official summary of this judgment prepared by the Court, once, in a national newspaper with widespread coverage, in an adequate and legible font, and (c) this judgment, in its entirety, available for one year on an official website of the State. The State must inform this Court immediately when it has made each of the publications ordered, regardless of the one-year time frame for presenting its first report established in the seventeenth operative paragraph of the judgment. 207. Regarding the act to acknowledge responsibility requested by the representatives, the Court considers that the delivery of this judgment and the reparations ordered herein are sufficient and adequate. Cf. Case of the Los Dos Erres Massacre v. Guatemala, supra, para. 231, and Case of Omeara Carrascal et al. v. Colombia, supra, para. 293. 243 Cf. Case of Montero Aranguren et al. (Retén de Catia) v. Venezuela. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of July 5, 2006. Series C No. 150, para. 139, and Case of Terrones Silva et al. v. Peru. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of September 26, 2018. Series C No. 360, para. 246. 244 Cf. Case of the Yakye Axa Indigenous Community v. Paraguay. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of June 17, 2005. Series C No. 125, para. 227, and Case of Gorigoitía v. Argentina, supra, para. 68. 242 47