17 agencies. Even though the State alleged that this is a line of investigation, which has not offered a satisfactory explanation regarding the factors that have hindered, so far, the association of other state agents, in spite of the clear existence of evidence in this sense. It is convenient to recall that in the Judgment, the Court noted that members of the Armed Forces of the State adopted measures tending to cover the facts and that the massacre could not have been prepared and carried out without the collaboration, acquiescence, and tolerance of high officials of the Armed Forces23, circumstance that is also shown by the decisions of the internal judicial authorities24 and the statements of the identified and convicted perpetrators and demobilized paramilitary officers. 44. That, the Court deems that there still exists a situation of impunity in the instant case, as far as the truth of the facts has not been totally determined; specially, as to the determination and possible punishment of the perpetrators and instigators. In order to continue monitoring this aspect, it is necessary for the State to continue submitting complete and updated information on all the actions taken; specially, information on the mechanisms which make it possible to include into the investigation, the relevant information and documentation furnished within the framework of other internal mechanisms, as well as the reasons why some of the prosecuted or convicted persons have not been arrested and the measures to be adopted in that sense. Furthermore, the State must publicly disseminate the result of this process, according to the terms of the Judgment, so that Colombian society may know the truth about what happened. The publication is closely related to the promptness with which the investigations should have been conducted since the massacre occurred and, particularly, since the delivery of the Judgment of this Court. Based on the foregoing, the Tribunal shall continue waiting for the results of the investigations in order to determine what may correspond in relation to this aspect. * * * Steps to identify the victims and their next-of- kin (operative paragraph eight of the Judgment) 45. That, regarding the obligation to immediately take such steps as may be necessary to individually identify, within a reasonable time, the victims who were executed and made to disappear, as well as their next of kin, the State informed on the meetings held within the framework of the M.O.S., in which it was agreed upon the text of the publication to locate the victims’ next-of-kin - information that would be verified by the Attorney General’s Office-, and the means to publish the announcements by means of a radio and television broadcaster and the newspaper, to which end they prepared an unique format to collect information and a mechanism to forward such information to the Attorney General's Office, in a confidential way. According to the Attorney General's Office, by June 2008, 10 persons, who consider themselves to be next-of-kin of the victims, have showed up; such information is still being verified. 46. That, during the hearing, the State informed on the announcements by means of a radio broadcaster, a television broadcaster and a newspaper, as ordered in the Judgment. The State acknowledged that such announcements were not published 23 Cf. Case of the “Maripirán Massacre” V. Colombia, supra nota 8, paras. 96.30 to 96.46, 116, 120 and 121. 24 Cf. the consideration made in the Judgment regarding the decisions of the Constitutional Court and the Superior Council of Judicature (Cf. Case of the “Maripirán Massacre” V. Colombia, supra nota 8, paras. 117 and 118).