70 specifically grave nature of the forced disappearance of persons,242 the protection that could be offered by the existing criminal regulations regarding plagiarism or kidnapping, torture, or homicide, among others, is not enough.243 239. The Court observes that the crime of forced disappearance has been in force in the Mexican legal system since the year 2001 (infra para. 319), that is, prior to the presentation of the preliminary inquiry before the District Judge on duty in August 2005 (supra para. 188). In that sense, the Tribunal reiterates, as it has done in other cases, that since this is a crime of permanent execution, upon going into force the legal definition of the crime of forced disappearance of persons in the State, the new law results applicable since the criminal behavior is still in execution, without this representing a retroactive application. Courts of the highest Hierarchy of the States of the American continent, such as the Supreme Court of Justice of Peru, the Constitutional Court of Peru, the Supreme Court of Justice of Venezuela, the Consitutional Court of Colombia,244 and even, the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation of Mexico (supra note 31), have issued rulings in this same sense. 240. For this Tribunal the State’s argument according to which in this case there was an “unsurpassable obstacle” for the application of the crime of forced disappearance of persons in force in Mexico, based on the fact that the alleged responsible party had gone into retirement prior to the going into force of the criminal definition, is inadmissible. The Court considers that as long as the fate or whereabouts of the victim have not been established, the forced disappearance remains invariable regardless of the changes in the nature of “public official” of the author. In cases such as the present, in which the victim has been missing for 35 years, it is reasonable to assume that the characteristic required by the active subject can vary in time. In that sense, if the State’s argument were to be accepted, impunity would be favored. 241. Taking into account the aforementioned, this Court considers that pursuant with the principle of nullum crimen nulla poena sine lege praevia, the figure of forced disappearance constitutes the legal classification applicable to the facts of the present case. (d) Reasonable term for the duration of the investigations 242. The Commission and the representatives stated that there is a delay in the investigation of the facts. 242 Pursuant with the Preamble of the CIDFP, forced disappearance “is an affront to the conscience of the Hemisphere and a grave and abominable offense against the inherent dignity of the human being,” and its systematic practice “constitutes a crime against humanity.” 243 Cf. Economic and Social Council of the United Nations. Report of the Work Group on Forced or Involuntary Disappearance of Persons, General Observation to Article 4 of the Declaration on the Protection of all Persons from Enforced Disappearances of January 15, 1996. (E/CN. 4/1996/38); Case of Heliodoro Portugal v. Panama, supra note 24, para. 181. On the crime of illegal deprivation of freedom in its modality of plagiarism and kidnapping in Mexico, Cf. Article 366 of the Federal Criminal Code (dossier of appendixes to the respondent’s plea, appendix III(3), page 86) 244 Cf. Supreme Court of Justice of Peru, judgment dated March 20, 2006, Case File: 111-04, D. D Cayo Rivera Schreiber; Constitutional Court of Peru, judgment of March 18, 2004, case file N° 2488-2002-HC/TC, para. 26 (at http://www.tc.gob.pe/jurisprudencia/2004/02488-2002-HC.html) and judgment of December 9, 2004, case file N° 2798-04-HC/TC, para. 22 (at http://www.tc.gob.pe/jurisprudencia/2005/02798-2004-HC.html); Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation of Mexico, Thesis: P./J. 49/2004, supra note 31; Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, judgment of August 10, 2007, and Constitutional Court of Colombia, Judgment C-580/02 of July 31, 2002.