2 d) The adoption of the legislative and any other measures necessary to adapt Guatemalan domestic laws to the international norms of human rights and humanitarian law, and to make these norms fully effective in the domestic sphere. 6. The communication of the State of Guatemala (hereinafter “the State”) of September 13, 2006 and its annexes in which it described a series of steps taken during the years 1995, 1996, 1997, 1999, and 2006 to determine the whereabouts of Efraín Bámaca Velásquez. Specifically, it mentioned that on August 9, 2006 it “requested that the Public Prosecutors’ Office reactivate the investigation in order to establish the whereabouts of Mr. Bámaca Velásquez’s body and those responsible for the fact, and thus continue with the proceedings and issue a judgment according to the law.” On the other hand it stated that “the corresponding publications [of the Judgment] were made in the Diario de Centroamérica on June 14, 2005 and in El Periódico on June 5, 2006.” Finally, it indicated that “[w]ith the purpose of adapting the Guatemalan legislation to international human rights norms, a High Level Commission was [created] in which officials of the three State Bodies and of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, as well as the Ombudsman’s Office, the office of Attorney General of the Nation, and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs participated.” 7. The observations made by the representatives of the victim and his next of kin (hereinafter “the representatives”) on October 13, 2006, in which they acknowledged that the State complied with the publication of the Judgment in the terms stated in the Judgment on Reparations (supra Having Seen paragraph number 2). However, regarding the location of the remains and the investigation of the facts, they stated that “no effective action tending to clarify the facts occurred and establish the whereabouts of the remains of Mr. Efraín Bámaca Velásquez has been carried out [and that] the State has not carried out an investigation leading to know, at least, what happened to the victim’s remains.” At the same time, they pointed out that “since the year 1999 up to [...] August 9, 2006 there was no State initiative to continue with the investigation, thus continuing the impunity of the case.” Regarding the High Level Commission allegedly appointed for the effects of adapting the Guatemalan legislation to international norms, they expressed that the State “did not provide any information to prove said appointment, [nor] did it explain the specific duties of said [C]omission, the mandate granted to it, and more specifically, it did not mention its advances.” 8. The State’s communication of October 25, 2006, in which it informed of the celebration of a public act of acknowledgment of international responsibility on October 16, 2006 at the “Patio de la Paz of the Palacio Nacional de la Cultura, presided by Mr. Frank Rafael La Rue Lewy, who was appointed by the President of the Republic, Oscar Berger Perdomo, and by the Vice-President of the Republic, Eduardo Stein Barrillas.” Pursuant to that expressed by the State, in said “act Mrs. Jennifer Harbury, the victim’s widow, a representative of the family, and two friends of Mr. Bámaca Velásquez were present.” 9. The observations made by the Inter-American Commission of Human Rights (hereinafter “the Commission” or “the Inter-American Commission”) on October 31, 2006, in which it stated that it regretted the lack of advances regarding the location of the remains of Mr. Bámaca Velásquez; that the obligation to adopt legislative measures of adaptation to international norms is still pending; that “it considered” the publications