41 209. The Commission deemed that “the first and most important measure of reparation to be adopted in the instant case is to cease denial of justice,” and that it is “of vital importance that the truth about the facts and the resulting responsibilities […] be established, in order to strengthen the notion that prohibition of torture is absolute and that failure to comply therewith entails real consequences.” In turn, the representative requested the Court that the State be required to “effectively conduct the necessary investigation into the facts so that those responsible for the serious illegal acts committed be prosecuted, tried, and punished,” and that administrative and judicial proceedings be started against the police personnel involved in the crimes described, and that all police members who had been unduly promoted be discharged. [T]he same request was made regarding all those who breached their duties, by concealing and/or committing illegal acts to the detriment of the proceedings which had been started.” 210. In this regard, the State argued that it has accepted the recommendations made by the [Inter-American Commission] and has agreed to make its best efforts to conclude as soon as possible the investigations into the facts which caused damage to Mr. Bueno-Alves while he was held in the custody of the Judicial Power. Once such circumstances have been clearly determine[d], the State may adopt the appropriate measures so that the commission of crimes does not go unpunished, submitting those responsible for the acts of torture and denial of justice to the pertinent and most effective administrative and judicial proceedings for the fulfillment of such objective. 211. Taking the foregoing into consideration, as well as the Court’s case law,99 the Court requires the State to conduct forthwith the pertinent investigations so that those responsible for the facts described in the instant case be identified and punished according to law. The State must guarantee that the victim may have full access and capacity to take part in all stages and procedures during such investigations and proceedings, pursuant to the domestic legislation and the provisions of the American Convention. b) Protection of the victim and his next of kin and transfer to the Oriental Republic of Uruguay 212. The representative requested the Court that Argentina be required to guarantee the life, physical integrity, and safety of the victim and his next of kin “during their stay in the territory of the Argentine Republic, while these proceedings are being conducted and until their return to their country of origin, the Oriental Republic of Uruguay. Furthermore, it requested that Argentina be required that “upon the [v]ictim’s decision to return to his country of origin, it ordered that his son-in-law, Sergio Oscar Roldán, who works at the main offices of Banco Nación Argentina (Argentina’s National Bank), be transferred to its [o]ffices in the city of Montevideo (Uruguay), with the same category he had at the moment such transfer were required.” 213. The State argued that there are no “factual grounds which may even allow examining this request.” 214. The Court finds that it has not been proven that the life, physical integrity or security of the victim or those of his next of kin are at risk. Furthermore, the Court considers that the above-mentioned claims have no bearing on the events under examination in the instant case. Therefore, it dismisses them. 99 Cf. Case of La Cantuta, supra note 14, para. 228; Case of the Miguel Castro-Castro Prison, supra note 14, paras. 440 and 441, and Case of Vargas-Areco, supra note 14, paras. 153, 155, and 156.