1. The States Parties undertake to prevent and punish torture in accordance with the terms of this Convention. (…) 6. In accordance with the terms of Article 1, the States Parties shall take effective measures to prevent and punish torture within their jurisdiction. The States Parties shall ensure that all acts of torture and attempts to commit torture are offenses under their criminal law and shall make such acts punishable by severe penalties that take into account their serious nature. The States Parties likewise shall take effective measures to prevent and punish other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment within their jurisdiction. 1. General considerations on the forced disappearance of persons 82. Since its earliest cases, the Inter-American Court has referred to the practice of forced disappearances in the following terms: Forced or involuntary disappearance constitutes one of the most serious and cruel human rights violations, because it not only produces arbitrary deprivation of liberty, but it also endangers the integrity of the person, as well as the security and very life of the detainee. Moreover, it puts the person in a completely defenseless state, and brings in its wake other related crimes. This is why it is so important that the State adopt all necessary measures to prevent said acts, and that it investigate and punish the perpetrators, and also inform the families of the whereabouts of the disappeared persons and compensate them if appropriate.65 83. As regards the characteristics of forced disappearance, the Commission and the Court have stated that the CIDFP, along with other international instruments,66 is in agreement that the following are the concurrent elements comprising forced disappearance: a) deprivation of freedom; b) the direct intervention of agents of the state or persons acting with the acquiescence of the state; and c) refusal to acknowledge the detention and to reveal the fate or whereabouts of the person in question.67 84. Moreover, the Commission has repeatedly stated that forced disappearance is a continuous or permanent violation, which in turn suggests that its effects are prolonged over time as long as the fate or whereabouts of the victim are not established. This characteristic puts the State in a situation of a continuing violation of its international obligations until such time as there is clarity regarding the fate of the victim.68 85. In view of the nature of the violation as a continuous, autonomous multiple offense, the InterAmerican Court has pointed out that in analyzing a possible forced disappearance, it is important not to focus 65 66. Inter-American Court, Case of Blake Vs. Guatemala. Preliminary objections, Judgment of July 2, 1996, Series C No. 27, para. 66 The Court refers to the following instruments: United Nations Economic and Social Council, Report of the Working Group on the Forced or Involuntary Disappearance of Persons, General Comments on Article 4 of the Declaration on the Protection of All Persons against Forced Disappearances of January 15, 1996 (E/CN. 4/1996/38), para. 55; and Article 2 of the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons against Forced Disappearances. 67 IACHR, Report No. 111/09. Case 11324. Merits. Narciso González Medina. Dominican Republic, November 10, 2009, Para. 130; and Inter-American Court, Case of Anzualdo Castro Vs. Peru. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs, Judgment of September 22, 2009, Series C No. 202, para. 60. 68 IACHR, Petition to the Inter-American Court in the case of Renato Ticona Estrada et al (12527) against the Republic of Bolivia, August 8, 2007, para. 108. 18