45 162. The Commission understood that the right of access to justice has been violated until an impartial and effective investigation into the facts has been conducted. It added that, according to the Court’s case law, comprehensive reparation requires the State to investigate the facts with due diligence, so as to prosecute and punish those responsible for Mr. Garibaldi’s death. The victims should have full access and capacity to act at all stages and in all instances of these investigations, in accordance with domestic law and the provisions of the Convention, and the State should ensure effective compliance with the decisions adopted by the domestic courts. It acknowledged the State’s efforts to re-open the Police Investigation and, in this regard, understood that it was essential that the State comply with its obligation to avoid and combat impunity by carrying out a genuine, exhaustive, impartial and effective investigation into the death of Sétimo Garibaldi. 163. The representatives asked the Court to order the State to investigate and punish the masterminds and perpetrators of Sétimo Garibaldi’s death under criminal law. 164. In its final arguments brief, the State indicated that, since 2004, when the order was emitted to close the Investigation, no new evidence had been submitted to the Public Prosecutor’s Office that would have justified re-opening it. However, as a result of the testimony of Vanderlei Garibaldi and Giovani Braun in these proceedings before the InterAmerican Court, the Public Prosecutor’s Office considered that they had provided evidence that was substantially new and, on April 20, 2009, requested the re-opening of the investigation, which the Loanda Court ordered on the same day. This measure responds to the first request of the Commission and the representatives. Consequently, in the State’s opinion, the re-opening of the Police Investigation invalidates the purpose of this request. 165. In this judgment the Court has established that the investigation conducted in the instant case did not constitute an effective remedy guaranteeing real access to justice for the victims, within a reasonable time, and including clarification of the facts, and identification and, if applicable, punishment of those responsible for the murder of Sétimo Garibaldi. 166. The Court assesses positively the re-opening of the investigation. Nevertheless, the Court considers that, although this measure is an important initial step forward, the resumption of the investigative procedure should be followed the measures needed to elucidate the facts and establish the corresponding responsibilities, as described in this judgment (supra paras. 122 to 127). 167. The Court reiterates that the State is obliged to combat this situation of impunity by all available means, because it leads to the chronic repetition of human rights violations and the total defenselessness of the victims and their next of kin, who have the right to know the truth about the facts.142 The recognition and exercise of the right to know the truth in a specific situation constitutes a measure of reparation.143 Consequently, in the instant case, the right to know the truth gives rise to an expectation of the victims that the State must satisfy.144 142 Cf. Case of Velásquez Rodríguez, supra note 18, para. 174; Bueno Alves v. Argentina. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of May 11, 2007. Series C No. 164, para. 90, and The Miguel Castro Castro Prison v. Peru. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 25, 2006. Series C No. 160, para. 440. 143 Cf. Escué Zapata v. Colombia. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of July 4, 2007. Series C No. 165, para. 165. 144 Cf. Castillo Páez v. Peru. Merits. Judgment of November 3, 1997. Series C No. 34, para. 90; La Cantuta v. Peru. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 29, 2006. Series C No. 162, para. 222, and Case of the Miguel Castro Castro Prison, supra note 142, para. 440.