74 (h) Regarding the State’s allegation that the victims have not used the mechanisms established in the civil jurisdiction and in Act No. 838/96, the Commission understood that this argument does not question the admissibility of the instant case, but rather the right of the next of kin to obtain any reparations the Court may order, and recalled that it had already referred to this allegation in its Report No. 75/04 on admissibility and merits in this case. In addition, it considered that the next of kin would encounter serious difficulties if they attempted to file civil actions in the domestic jurisdiction based on offenses regarding which no final judgment has been delivered determining the corresponding responsibilities. It also underscored that, although the 1992 Paraguayan Constitution established the Ombudsman mechanism and Act No. 838/96 included the procedure before the Ombudsman’s Office, it was not until 2001 that someone was appointed to occupy this position. The representatives’ arguments 106. In their final arguments brief, the representatives endorsed the Commission’s arguments concerning Articles 8 and 25 of the Convention in relation to Article 1(1) thereof. Regarding the State’s allegation that the victims had not used the mechanisms established in the civil jurisdiction and in Act No. 838/96, they considered that “this law only allowed certain victims and their next of kin to accede to a minimal sum,” and also that the lawsuits on “presumption of death” and on succession to prove the identity of the heirs, which the next of kin of the disappeared had to file before they could have access to the Ombudsman’s Office, could take many years. The State’s arguments 107. Regarding the alleged violation of Articles 8 and 25 of the Convention to the detriment of the next of kin of Agustín Goiburú Giménez, Carlos José Mancuello Bareiro and the brothers Benjamín and Rodolfo Ramírez Villalba, the State partially acknowledged its international responsibility (supra paras. 41, 50 and 54) and indicated, inter alia, that: (a) In the case of Agustín Goiburú: Although there had been a judicial delay in delivering judgment in the case, this is due to the shortcomings of the former penal system under which the proceedings were opened. They are governed by the rules of the said penal system, and the procedure is characterized by an inquisitorial system, and long complicated written proceedings, that no longer offer guarantees and much less solutions for the population; Paraguay has therefore modified its penal system and set up a transition process between the two systems; Since the procedural system does not allow prosecution in absentia (as in the case of General Alfredo Stroessner and Sabino Augusto Montanaro), and bearing in mind that two of the accused are deceased, the case is at a standstill;