34 The former system did not grant effective, simple and prompt recourse to the national courts. j. Report of Eduardo René Mayora-Alvarado, Dean of the Faculty of Law of the Francisco Marroquín University in Guatemala The witness testified that the system of criminal procedure in force in Guatemala in 1988 was fundamentally inquisitorial. The investigation was conducted during a secret summary phase. Once this phase had ended an analysis was made to determine whether or not to proceed to the criminal case. The investigation function was somewhat deficient. The remedy of habeas corpus is enshrined in the political constitution of Guatemala; it is a prompt and informal process that averts violation of rights, but is not ideal for restoring freedom when a victim is held by kidnappers. The remedy of amparo is an immediate action and one of the most important means of defense. The witness had no direct knowledge of cases in which any decision rendered in relation to amparo or habeas corpus had not been observed. In Guatemala extrajudicial statements had no probative value; what was important was for the proof to emerge within the debate. Guatemala was prone to systematic and deliberate violations of individuals’ rights and there was no real possibility of defense before the justice system; these circumstances began to change in the mid-1980s. He had no direct knowledge of intimidation of judges in Guatemala, although he did recall one or two cases in which prosecutors had to leave the country because they felt threatened. Under both the former and current systems, arrest without flagrante delicto or the order of a competent court would be illegal, but would not be kidnapping. If dismissal is ordered and the litigant to whom that decision was unfavourable did not appeal, the decision stands. There are crimes of public action in Guatemala, and the State’s obligation in such cases is to pursue them in accordance with the Code of Penal Procedure and the law of the Office of the Attorney-General. Strictly speaking, there is no constitutional obligation on the State to undertake all the actions. k. Report of Napoleón Gutiérrez-Vargas, Presiding Magistrate of the Seventh Chamber of the Court of Appeals of Guatemala, based in Quetzaltenango The witness testified that Decree 5273 (Code of Penal Procedure) remained in force in Guatemala well into 1994. This Code established the semi-secret, bureaucratic, formal, ritual and written inquisitorial system. In accordance with the abrogated law, once the summary phase was concluded, the part played by the accused in the act under investigation was established, and if the elements of the crime were proven, the case on the merits was opened. Under the former Code, as in the current one, extrajudicial statements are not given any value. The investigation conducted by the National Police is also given no weight if it is not ratified before the competent court. He knew of no case in which the judgment was rendered in Guatemala within three months, nor of any case in which the first instance, appeal and cassation for cases of crimes such as murder and kidnapping were heard by the courts within three months. Habeas corpus is a remedy accessible to any person and the tribunal is obliged to exercise it immediately, but it is not an effective recourse when someone is kidnapped by common criminals, because it is intended as a safeguard against unlawful detention by the authorities. In the legislation in force in 1988, a distinction was made between final dismissal and total dismissal. If the "white van case" had not been sub judice it would then have been settled under the current Code. A civil action may be brought independently of a criminal action