88 identification of their remains and those of persons buried in clandestine graves 290. The Commission asked the Court to order the State to locate and deliver to the families the mortal remains of the disappeared victims, and to provide the necessary means to continue the process of identification and return of the executed victims’ mortal remains. The representatives did not refer to this point in their pleadings and motions brief. 344 291. The State argued that on July 19, 2007, the National Institute of Forensic Sciences of Guatemala (INACIF), an auxiliary institution of the administration of justice whose main purpose is to provide an independent scientific investigation services and issue technical scientific opinions that provide the judicial authorities with valid and reliable evidence in legal proceedings, began its operations. It pointed out that on December 11, 2012, a cooperation agreement was signed between INACIF and the Guatemalan Forensic Anthropology Foundation (FAFG) for a period of five years. 345 In addition, it explained the objective of Law 3590, “Law of the Commission for the Search for Victims of Forced Disappearance and other Forms of Disappearance” is to design, evaluate and execute search plans for victims of disappearance, through the study, documentation, systematization, analysis, registration and follow-up of cases of forced disappearance and other forms of disappearance. According to the State, this bill is in the process of being approved by the Guatemalan Congress and obtained the favorable opinions of the Finance and Currency Committee and the Legislation and Constitutional Commission on August 29, 2007 and March 22, 2011, respectively. Finally, it stressed the difficulties faced “in the tasks of locating, identifying and handing over the victims,” particularly in relation to DNA analysis. 292. The Court considers that the next of kin of victims of forced disappearance have a just expectation that the whereabouts of their loved ones be identified or their remains be found so that their identity can be determined with certainty. This constitutes a measure of reparation and, therefore, generates a correlative duty for the State to satisfy it. 346 In turn, it allows the next of kin to alleviate the anguish and suffering caused by such uncertainty. 347 The recovery and identification of the remains of the persons who died and were buried in clandestine graves as a result of the facts of the case is also a just expectation of the next of kin. Receiving the body of a forcibly disappeared or executed person is of the utmost importance for their next of kin, since it allows them to bury them according to their beliefs, as well as to close the mourning process. The Court also considers that the remains are evidence of what happened and, together with the place where they are found, can provide valuable information about the perpetrators of the violations or the institution to which they belonged. 348 293. The Court appreciates the willingness expressed by the State to undertake the work of searching for, recovering and handing over the remains of the disappeared or executed victims to their relatives. However, the Court notes that in the instant case, the investigations initiated have not been aimed at locating all the disappeared victims, nor have all the remains found in 344 Extemporaneously, during the public hearing they asked the Court to establish the State’s obligation to search for, identify and determine the manner of death and to deliver to the families of the victims of forced disappearance the remains that are located and identified. In their final written final arguments, they requested that the State be ordered to conduct a serious investigation to determine the whereabouts of the disappeared persons and to find the mortal remains of the executed victims, as well as to proceed with their proper and accurate identification and delivery to their next of kin. 345 According to the State, the agreement aims to “establish general guidelines for cooperation between both institutions; maintain communication through different channels in order to coordinate actions aimed at optimizing expert assessments taking advantage of the complementarity of knowledge, experiences and mutual advice on new technologies, methods and international standards; as well as the development of projects of common interest.” 346 Cf. Case of Neira Alegría et al. v. Peru. Reparations and Costs. Judgment of September 19, 1996. Series C No. 29, para. 69, and Case of the Peasant Community of Santa Bárbara v. Peru, para. 295. 347 Cf. Case of Ticona Estrada et al. v. Bolivia, para. 155, and Case of the Peasant Community of Santa Bárbara v. Peru, para. 295. 348 Cf. Case of the Dos Erres Massacre v. Guatemala, para. 245, and Case of the Peasant Community of Santa Bárbara v. Peru, para. 295.