11 The State acknowledges that, in the past, specifically during the regime of Alfredo Stroessner (1954-1989), grave human rights violations were perpetrated that must be investigated, punished and repaired adequately by the State. However, it is important to stress that, as of 1989, with the fall of General Stroessner and the re-establishment of democracy, the Paraguayan State has constantly advanced towards the effective respect for and guarantee of human rights in Paraguay. One of these measures, of great importance in the instant case, was the judicial reform, which, naturally, was slow, owing to its complexity. […] It is evident that, during the 1954-1989 regime, the State did not observe the first obligation referred to in the Court’s case law, which is that of “respect for the rights and freedoms” embodied in the Convention. Regarding the second obligation, “that of ensuring” the free and full exercise of the rights recognized in the Convention, the State presents the following arguments to attenuate its responsibility. The Court’s case law with regard to this obligation indicates that it implies the obligation of the States Parties to organize the government and, in general, all the structures by which the exercise of public authority is manifested, so that they are capable of ensuring juridically the free and full exercise of human rights. There is no doubt that [the] obligation to ensure rights was not complied with by the State during the 1954-1989 regime, because instead of organizing the Government so that it was capable of juridically ensuring the free and full exercise of human rights, it was established under a repressive system that systematically violated human rights. Nevertheless, it is important to mention that, contrary to other countries of the Southern Cone, Paraguay never adopted amnesty laws and recognized the non-applicability of the prescription of grave human rights violations. The State affirms that these are examples of preventive measures designed to preclude the repetition of abuses such as those that occurred during the 1954-1989 dictatorship. […T]he State calls attention to several positive measures adopted following the re-establishment of the rule of law. In this context, Paraguay ratified the American Convention on August 24, 1989, shortly after the return of the civil regime. Thus, the Convention was the first international human rights treaty that became effective in Parliament […]. Regarding the legal reform, the State emphasizes the inclusion of the prohibition of torture and the non-applicability of the prescription of crimes against humanity in the 1992 Constitution, the reform of the Penal Code and the Criminal Procedural Code in 1997 and 1998, respectively, and the promulgation of Act No 2,225 “creating the Truth and Justice Commission” on September 11, 2003. Lastly, the Paraguayan State is observing its obligation to compensate the victims of violations of the human rights embodied in the American Convention [because], in 1996, it adopted Act No. 836 [sic] “which compensates victims of human rights violations during the 1954 to 1989 dictatorship.” […] The State acquiesces to the claims of the petitioner regarding the violation, to the detriment of the victim, Agustín Goiburú, illegally and arbitrarily detained and disappeared during the regime of Alfredo Stroessner (1954-1989), of Article 4, right to life, and Article 5, right to humane treatment, as specified by the petitioner, as well as Article 7, recognized and guaranteed by the American Convention on Human Rights based on the arbitrary and illegal detention of the victim and his forced disappearance which continues to this day. The State acquiesces to the claims of the petitioner regarding the violation, to the detriment of the victim, Carlos José Mancuello, illegally and arbitrarily detained and disappeared during the regime of General Alfredo Stroessner (1954-1989), of Article 4 [right to life] and Article 5, right to humane treatment, as specified by the petitioner, as well as Article 7, recognized and guaranteed by the American Convention on Human Rights based on the arbitrary and illegal detention of the victim and his forced disappearance which continues to this day. The State acquiesces to the claims of the petitioner, Julio Darío Ramírez Villalba, regarding the violation, to the detriment of the victims, Rodolfo and Benjamín Ramírez Villalba, illegally and arbitrarily detained and disappeared during the regime of Alfredo Stroessner (1954-1989), of Article 4, right to life, and Article 5, right to humane treatment, as specified by the petitioner, as well as Article 7, recognized and guaranteed