5 of those responsible for crime concealment in relation to these proceedings; and iii) that, through “efficient collaboration agreements,” former members of the Colina Group agreed to surrender information concerning the events under investigation. In relation to the delays in the investigation, they pointed out that: i) judicial proceedings N° 68-2007 against Vladimiro Montesinos were still pending resolution, and the case file was forwarded to the Third Special Criminal Anticorruption Division after expiration of the investigation deadline; ii) that the judgment delivered in judicial proceedings N° 19-2001-AV against Alberto Fujimori-Fujimori was appealed against for annulment; and iii) that the State should furnish information on the measures adopted to locate and arrest the fugitive defendants in proceedings N° 03-2003, on whom prosecution reserve was imposed. Furthermore, they stated that the First Criminal Special Division was conducting a criminal process, undisclosed by the State, against Alberto Pinto-Cárdenas and Wilmen Yarlequé-Ordinola, who were convicted on July 3, 2008 to 20 years' imprisonment for the events in the instant case. Upon filing of an appeal for annulment, the conviction and sentence imposed on Wilmen Yarlequé-Ordinola was affirmed, the conviction against Alberto Pinto-Cárdenas was declared null and void, and an order granting a new trial was entered. Therefore, they considered that monitoring compliance with this measure of reparation should remain open. 9. That, concerning the measures adopted by the State, the Commission considered that important actions aiming to complete the investigation, prosecute and punish those responsible were taken, while it is awaiting information on the progress thereof. 10. That the Court highly appreciates the efforts made in furtherance of the investigation of the events. Thus, the criminal liability of several individuals responsible for the violations committed in the instant case, including former high-rank State officers, has been declared, while some proceedings are still pending final resolution. For this reason, the Tribunal understands that even though the State has made great progress in the investigation of the complex structure of the individuals involved in the planning and execution of the grave human rights violations in the instant case, further investigation should be made. Consequently, in order to continue monitoring compliance with this paragraph, the Court requires the State to keep informing on the progress of the ongoing investigations and/or on any new investigative actions, as well as on the results of the “efficient collaboration agreements,” on the fugitive defendants, on the process reported by the representatives, and on the appeal for annulment filed in judicial proceedings N° 19-2001-AV. * * * Search for and identification of disappeared victims 11. That in relation to the duty to forthwith search and identify the mortal remains of the victims and, in turn, deliver them as soon as practicable to their relatives and bear the burial costs (operative paragraph ten of the Judgment,) the State informed that on July 17, 2008, at the premises of the Equipo Peruano de Antropolgía Forense (Peruvian Anthropological Forensic Team), six funerary coffins were delivered to the victims' next of kin, through their representatives, who were also offered burial services consisting of two funeral hearses, a funeral chapel and transportation for funeral and burial services. The evidence furnished by the State shows that the expert witnesses “determined that the remains were incomplete and that they belonged to 8 adult individuals, there were two bone parts of two females, the remains of a third individual did not match the saliva samples taken from eight out of ten next of kin, for there was a likelihood that this bone part belonged to Felipe Flores-Chipana or Manuel [Marcelino Máximo] Rosales-Cárdenas. They ruled out that the female pelvis and femur bone parts did not belong to Bertila Lozano, but