4 14. In conservation of the information presented by the State and the representatives, the Court observes that the dental treatment awarded in the Judgment has begun and that medical attention for the other injuries referenced in the Judgment has yet to commence. Thus, the Court requests that the State provide updated information regarding this issue in its next report (infra Operative Paragraph 2). Consequently, the Tribunal considers that the State to have partially complied with the obligation set forth in operative paragraph nine of the Judgment. c) Regarding the obligation to conclude the criminal proceedings undertaken as a result of the events that gave rise to the violations addressed in the present case, and to settle the issue in accordance with the provisions of the law 15. The State indicated that in the criminal investigation concerning the torture suffered by Mr. Bayarri, the Criminal Trial Chamber No. 39, Department 135, reported that “on September 23, 2009, case number 66.138/96 was set for trial after dismissing the defense’s argument.” 16. The representatives stated that, regarding case No. 66.138/1996 (ex 32.289/1991) put forward due to the alleged torture and illegal imprisonment of Mr. Bayarri, as well as the misrepresentation of facts and false testimony to his detriment, on “May 30, 2006, the Court ordered the closure of the examination phase [of the investigation], thereby sending the case to its [p]lenary phase so that the Court [would] issue a judgment” in accordance with Law 2372. Despite this, the representatives stated that in virtue of an “invocation by the [...] accused,” the case began to be processed pursuant to Law 23.984, and “as a result, [as of] March 2010, [...] the case continues to follow the same course as it did 18 and a half years ago.” The representatives stated that the case filed against two of the suspects was dismissed at the first and second instances because of an alleged limitation of criminal proceedings and that this decision was raised again on appeal on March 27, 2008, by the Prosecutor General and the representatives of the victim. The representatives further stressed that, in spite of the case, one of the police officers (allegedly involved in the torture, illegal imprisonment, and other criminal acts against the victim) continues to ascend the ranks within the police force, reaching Commissioner of an important General Directorate of Police. Furthermore, the representatives observed that in case No. 13.754/04 concerning a judicial official accused of, “among other crimes, failure to fulfill [o]fficial [p]ublic [d]uties and the concealment of serious crimes committed” against Mr. Bayarri. The charges were dismissed at the first and second instances, thus causing the matter to be taken to appeal on June 1, 2009. At present, the case continues to be pending before the Cámara Nacional de Casación Penal [National Chamber of Criminal Appeals in Cassation]. For that reason, the representatives rejected the excessive delays in settling the alleged human rights violations committed against Mr. Bayarri, which they categorized as irregular, abnormal, incredible, and without precedent in Argentina. 17. The Commission stated that, during its pendency before the Court, the most important reparations measure in this case was still the cessation of the continual denial of justice faced by Mr. Bayarri. It expressed its concern that since the notification of Judgment there have not been any significant advances in this investigation. Consequently, the Commission stated that the State’s duty to investigate relates to the obligation to prevent and fight impunity, noting that such actions are not limited to criminal matters but also concerns the disciplinary and administrative responsibilities of judicial personnel who violated due process and other legal guarantees to the detriment of Mr. Bayarri.