“during the investigation and prosecution, the State shall guarantee the victims full access 6 and the capacity to act at all stages.” Therefore, in its next report, the State must submit information regarding these statements made by the representatives. B. The obligation to continue with the effective search for and the immediate location of Mr. Radilla Pacheco or, if applicable, of his remains (Operative Paragraph 9 of the Judgment) 12. The State indicated that from October 19 to 28, 2010 new excavations aimed at locating Rosendo Radilla Pacheco were carried out at the place “where he presumably disappeared.” It indicated that “it has continued these efforts in full agreement with the victims and their representatives,” and that the excavations have been carried out by experts proposed by Ms. Tita Radilla Martínez. The State affirmed that on October 28, 2010, the excavation concluded “without having found clues, evidence, or skeletal remains.”7 It also indicated that “the archeological expert [proposed by Ms. Radilla Pacheco] was asked to conclusively certify his experience[...], documenting cases [in which he has intervened as part of the Forensic Anthropology Foundation of Guatemala, the methodology used, and the results obtained.” The State also indicated that the expert “was asked to state the similarities or analogies between those cases and [this one]. Once [this] requirement is fulfilled, […] the agent of the Federal Public Ministry of the Federation shall proceed according to the law.” 13. The representatives affirmed that actions carried out by the Attorney General’s Office "still do not reflect the seriousness necessary in this case, as the most important measure ordered in the investigation since the Judgment was handed down is the excavation ordered in the former military barracks of Atoyac de Álvarez[, but] this excavation was ordered in places that had already been investigated in 2008.” In that regard, they indicated that the experts proposed by Ms. Tita Radilla, who were accredited during the preliminary inquiry, issued a series of recommendations after excavations concluded on October 28, 2010. They stated that despite the fact that these experts “were authorized by the [Attorney General’s Office], the [agent] of the Public Ministry has questioned their recommendations and[,] thus[,] measures aimed at searching for Mr. Rosendo Radilla Pacheco’s skeletal remains have been delayed.” This agent indicated to the representatives that “excavations could not continue until the expert of the Forensic Anthropology Foundation of Guatemala could prove the Foundation's experience.” Finally, the representatives stated that the agent of the Public Ministry, in charge of executing the aforementioned preliminary inquiry, told them that the Ministry did not have the resources necessary to continue with excavations or to hire experts in forensic archeology, and thus “the cost of hiring experts would be charged to [the representatives if they] offere[d] them as collaborators in the measures carried out, even if the Attorney General’s Office were to decide to consider them as official experts and not as independent experts.” 6 Case of Radilla Pacheco v. Mexico, supra note 5, para. 334. 7 It indicated that during the excavations, representatives of the National Commission on Human Rights, the Unit for the Promotion and Defense of Human Rights of the Ministry of the Interior, and the “Office of the High Commissioner of the United Nations […] were present. Additionally, personnel of the Social Communications Department of the Attorney General's Office were also present. The latter “took on the task of ensuring that the media was given access to the place and of issuing various bulletins that were presented” through the web page of the Attorney General’s Office. Other members of the organization that represents the victims that are not accredited in proceedings were allowed to be present “in order to strengthen the psycho-social support of Rosendo Radilla Pacheco’s next of kin.” 5