27 clarify the circumstances surrounding the death or to progress on the investigation to effectively establish the commission of acts of torture.” Dr. Ravioli concluded that the truth about the actual events could have only been found “through exhumation and performance of an autopsy on the body,” but said procedures were not carried out (supra para. 69.B.3). 90. Based on the foregoing, the Court considers that the State had the obligation to exhume and perform an autopsy on the body of the minor Vargas-Areco to establish, with the maximum degree of certainty, if he was subject to acts of torture. The obligation of the State became effective at the time the State learnt of the alleged acts of torture. As regards to the jurisdiction of the Court, the State failed to comply with the duty to exhume and perform said autopsy after March 26, 1993. Pursuant to the expert opinions of physicians Fondebrider and Ravioli (supra para. 69.B.2 and 69.B.3), even considering the natural decomposition process undergone by the body, the State could have performed certain surveys after that date to establish if the body of the minor Vargas-Areco had bone fractures that could be associated with acts of torture. 91. Mention must be made of the fact that the United Nations Manual on the Effective Prevention and Investigation of Extra-legal, Arbitrary and Summary Executions (hereinafter “the Istanbul Protocol”) sets forth that state authorities conducting an investigation should at least, inter alia: a) identify the victim; b) collect and preserve evidence related to the death in order to assist with any investigation; c) identify possible witnesses and obtain testimonies in relation to the death under investigation; d) determine the cause, manner, place and time of death, as well as any pattern or practice which may have brought about such death, and e) distinguish between natural death, accidental death, suicide and homicide. Moreover, the Court points out that: a) a thorough investigation of the crime scene should be conducted, and b) rigorous autopsies and analyses of human remains should be performed by competent professionals, using the best procedures available.39 92. For the purposes of this case, it is particularly useful to bear in mind that Article 12 of the “Principles on the Effective Prevention and Investigation of Extralegal, Arbitrary and Summary Executions” sets forth that: The body of the deceased person shall not be disposed of until an adequate autopsy is conducted by a physician, who shall, if possible, be an expert in forensic pathology. [...] If the body has been buried and it later appears that an investigation is required, the body shall be promptly and competently exhumed for an autopsy. If skeletal remains are discovered, they should be carefully exhumed and studied according to systematic anthropological techniques. 93. Moreover, said procedures should take into consideration the international rules for documenting and interpreting forensic evidence elements regarding the commission of acts of torture and, particularly, those defined in the Istanbul Protocol.40 39 Cf. Case of Ximenes-Lopes, supra note 3, para. 179; and Case of the Ituango Massacres, supra note 3, para. 298; Case of Baldeón-García, supra note 3, para. 96; and UN, Manual on the Effective Prevention and Investigation of Extra-Legal, Arbitrary and Summary Executions, Doc E/ST/CSDHA/.12 (1991). 40 Cf. U.N.O., United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Geneva, 2001, available at: www.ohchr.org/english/about/publications/docs/8rev1.pdf.