93. As indicated (supra paras. 31 and 32), the State was informed of the deprivation of liberty of Mr. Palma Mendoza on the day this happened, May 16, 1997. Then, the following day, Lidia Bravo formally filed the respective complaint. The initial measures taken to investigate the facts and discover the whereabouts of Mr. Palma Mendoza were taken between May 17, 1997, when the XIth Judge of Manabí required the OID to proceed with the investigation, and May 23, 1997, when a police report was drafted recording “measures taken” in the context of the investigation resulting from the complaint (supra para. 33). In addition, there is evidence that, on May 21 and 22, 1997, the OID required the FAE to investigate the facts (supra para. 33). In addition, the proven facts reveal measures recorded in the preliminary police report of September 1, 1998, concerning the conduct of lawyers who assisted Lidia Bravo (supra para. 41). 2.4. Discovery and identification of Mr. Palma Mendoza’s body 94. In cases involving the discovery of human remains, the first step in an investigation must be to try and establish their identity116 in order to determine what happened; hence this is an important element to determine those responsible for the events that have occurred. In this regard, the Court has indicated that: […] the passage of time bears a directly proportionate relationship to the constraints to – and, in some cases, the impossibility of – obtaining evidence and/or testimony, complicating and even making ineffective or useless, the implementation of probative measures to clarify the facts investigated, identify the possible authors and participants, and determine the eventual criminal responsibilities. Despite this, the domestic authorities are not excused from making every effort 117 necessary in compliance with their obligation to investigate. 95. In the instant case, on May 23 and 26, 1997, two corpses were found on the banks of the Norcay river in the province of Guayas, and the police authorities proceeded to perform their “forensic examination,” with the intervention of a doctor, and their subsequent burial (supra para. 35). Following the statement made by Lenin Ordoñez, on February 29, 2000, it was realized that the corpse found on May 26, 1997, corresponded to Mr. Palma Mendoza, and it was exhumed and identified (supra paras. 42 and 43). 2.5 Determination of perpetrators and participants in the facts 96. The State Court initiated criminal proceedings for the facts related to the abduction of Mr. Palma Mendoza. Following the voluntary statement of Lenin Ordóñez on February 16, 2000, in the criminal proceedings before the XIth Judge of Manabí, the latter was accused of the facts that had occurred to Mr. Palma, together with other persons (supra paras. 42, 44 and 46). During the said criminal proceedings, on March 19, 2001, the Manabí Criminal Court sentenced and convicted Lenin Ordóñez, Freddy Contreras and Vicente Domínguez based on the determination of their perpetration of the facts, and the sentence was made final on June 26, 2002, when the Second Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice declared the appeal for annulment filed by the convicted men inadmissible (supra para. 61). Regarding the other individuals who had been implicated in the criminal case, a stay of proceedings was declared, first, provisionally on January 22, 2001, by the XIth Judge of Manabí, and then finally, on February 16, 2007, by the same judge, and confirmed on April 9, 2007, by the 116 Cf. Case of Juan Humberto Sánchez v. Honduras. Preliminary objection, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of June 7, 2003. Series C No.92, para. 127. 117 Cf. Case of Anzualdo Castro v. Peru. Preliminary objection, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of September 22, 2009. Series C No. 202, para. 135, and Case of González-Medina and family members v. Dominican Republic, para. 218. 30