limitations does not preclude taking these measures. Lastly, they asked the Court to order the State to disseminate broadly the results of the investigations in order to inform Brazilian society. 142. The State asserted that the alleged threats against Gabriel Sales Pimenta and his death are outside the temporal jurisdiction of the Court. It stated that because the statute of limitations was applied in accordance with the American Convention as well as with domestic law, not applying it would be inappropriate. It added that no negligent or careless acts by agents of the State have been confirmed and that, on the contrary, all procedures were followed rigorously in an effort to identify those responsible and punish them. 143. The Court recalls that this case concerns the violent death of a human rights defender who fought for the land rights of rural workers, in a context of structural impunity for violent deaths of human rights defenders. In this case, it is clear that the gross negligence of judicial officials, who failed to carry out a serious, effective investigation to determine what really happened to Mr. Sales Pimenta, turned the passage of time into a tool for impunity, as it allowed the statute of limitations to be applied (supra paras. 103, 104, and 120). 144. The Court reiterates that States have a duty to exercise enhanced due diligence for the violent deaths of human rights defenders because these defenders play a vital role for democracy. In this case, the proceedings were not conducted with enhanced due diligence—quite the opposite. The gross negligence of judicial officials allowed absolute impunity to prevail, as it did in the broader context at the time. 145. The Court has noted the context of structural impunity with respect to violence against human rights defenders of rural workers. It therefore deems it appropriate to order the State to create a working group to identify the causes and circumstances that give rise to that impunity and to develop lines of action aimed at rectifying them. 146. The working group shall be composed of five experts with the technical skills, moral suitability, and specific knowledge to carry out this work. One of them shall be a member of the National Council of Justice; this individual shall coordinate the group and facilitate its logistical operations. For the purpose of selecting the other four members, the State and the representatives shall within six months of the notification of this judgment provide the Court with a list of four independent experts. The Court will select two from each of these lists. The working group will be funded by the State. To carry out its work, the group will consult public bodies, academic institutions, and civil society organizations that can provide information for its report. The State shall ensure full access to all information the working group needs to carry out its task. The working group will have a consultative role, guiding and complementing the activities of government bodies, not usurping government functions. 147. The group shall have two years, counted from the date of its formation, to deliver a final report to the Court. That report shall be public and made available to government bodies and civil society. C. Measure of rehabilitation 148. The Commission asked the Court to order the State to provide the physical and mental health services necessary for the rehabilitation of Gabriel Sales Pimenta’s family members, should they so desire, and “with their agreement.” 149. In their final written arguments, the representatives asked that the State be ordered to ensure access to medical and psychological care specific to the kind “of trauma the victims experienced,” should the victims so desire and for the length of time deemed necessary on the basis of individual evaluations, and to provide the necessary medications and treatments. 38