95 time to accomplish its objectives. 366 The Court urges the State to continue with its current efforts and emphasizes the importance of implementing a system of continuous training, which will not be supervised by this Court. C.4.2. Adoption of a national strategy to search for and determine the whereabouts of persons who disappeared during the armed conflict in Peru Arguments of the parties 316. The Commission did not refer to this point. The representatives asked the Court to order the State to employ all available means to establish the fate or whereabouts of all the victims who disappeared during the Peruvian conflict, or to find their mortal remains, as the case may be. They also recalled that “[the] tracing of disappeared persons and the identification of their remains continues to be a pressing need in Peru.” In this sense, they requested that the Court reiterate to the State the obligation to adopt measures in this regard, as it did in the case of Anzualdo Castro. They also requested that, in the event that the victims’ mortal remains are found, the State be ordered to deliver them to their families as soon as possible and at no cost, as well as to cover funeral expenses. The State reported that to date, concrete measures have been taken to strengthen the investigation system in relation to forced disappearances. In this regard, the Ministry of Justice and Human Rights, together with the Institute of Legal Medicine and representatives of civil society, are currently preparing a draft bill aimed at comprehensively regulating the national policy for the search for persons who disappeared during the period of violence from 1980 to 2000, “and thus ensure their identification, so that they can later be handed over to their families.” Furthermore, the State indicated that it has been making improvements within the Specialized Forensic Team (EFE) of the Institute of Legal Medicine and Forensic Sciences of the Public Prosecution Service, “the group in charge of carrying out searches and investigations aimed at locating disappeared persons” and “investigating human rights violations in Peru during the years of the internal conflict 1980-2000.” In this regard, it referred in detail to these improvements, as indicated in paragraphs 312 and 313 of this judgment. Considerations of the Court 317. In this case, the Court has concluded that the forensic investigation in the search, recovery, analysis and identification of human remains has been characterized by a clear lack of thoroughness and due diligence, which is particularly serious, and has continued to the present day (supra para. 183). In this regard, the Court notes that the facts of this case took place in the context of Peru’s armed conflict, that there is a lack of agreement regarding the number of forced disappearances that occurred during this period, and that the percentage of victims identified to date is very low, in comparison with the total figures provided by entities such as the CVR. 367 On this point, the Court recalls that criminal investigation and prosecution is not incompatible with the adoption of different adequate and effective mechanisms to locate the whereabouts of disappeared persons or find their remains, so that their identity can be determined with certainty, and so that both measures can complement each other. 368 318. The Court appreciates the efforts made by the State, in particular, through the work carried out by the Specialized Forensic Team (EFE) of the Institute of Legal Medicine and Forensic Sciences of the Public Prosecutor’s Office (supra para. 314). Nevertheless, bearing in mind that Peru has recognized the need to comprehensively regulate the national policy for the search for persons who disappeared during the period of violence from 1980 to 2000, and that a draft bill is currently Cf. Case of Escher et al. v. Brazil, supra, para. 251, and Case Espinoza Gonzales v. Peru, supra, para. 326. Cf. Final Report of the CVR, 2003, Volume VI, Chapter 1.2 Forced disappearance of persons by State agents, pages 73-81, Available at http://www.cverdad.org.pe/ifinal/index.php; and statement of expert witness José Pablo Baraybar do Carmo at the public hearing on January 26, 2015. See also Case of Anzualdo v. Peru, supra, para. 188. 368 See Case of Gómez Palomino v. Peru. Monitoring compliance with judgment. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human rights of July 5, 2011, fifteenth considering paragraph. 366 367