13 At that time, the parties also signed an agreement that laid out certain commitments of the State with respect to the ongoing criminal proceeding under domestic jurisdiction. 67. At said hearing, the State also pointed out that “the new [G]overnment, echoing these situations, has proclaimed that the commitments undertaken in the Peace Accord are State commitments and due compliance with them is not open to question […]”. 68. That same day, in another document issued by COPREDEH, submitted to the Secretariat of the Commission, the State affirmed that: the Government of Guatemala ratifies and reiterates that in the case of the murder of anthropologist Myrna Mack Chang it is evident, notorious, and there should be no discussion still seeking to question or deny said facts that took place in October, 1990 in the capital city of Guatemala. […] What happened to Anthropologist Myrna Mack and her family is one of the paradigmatic cases ensuing from the our country’s legacy of 36 years of internal warfare, it is the past, in a war in which there was no system of law, nor was there an efficient and effective administration of justice. This is one of the many human rights violations that fatidically took place at that time. In a certain manner, the context of an internal armed conflict in which the armed forces developed their own strategies of counterinsurgency and indiscriminate repression, should be evaluated as a strong probability of subordination of the administration of justice to military influence, as factors that may have had an impact on the difficulties and irregularities in the proceeding, and which the applicant has repeatedly pointed out in the instant case. The fact that the direct perpetrator of the murder of the anthropologist was, when he committed the act, a specialist of the Guatemalan Army, as was stated in the judgment [that found him guilty], in fact entails possible institutional responsibility of the State, which can also ensue due to the inactivity, delay, and slowness of the proceeding against other Army officers who have been mentioned, opened by order of the Supreme Court of Justice. Without addressing and analyzing the causes which the applicant gives for slow progress of the proceeding begun in February, 1994, the Government of Guatemala accepts and recognizes as a matter of special concern that after 6 years only the investigative phase has been completed, and that the trial hast not yet begun despite the fact that it was opened in January, 1999. 69. As was pointed out before, in Report Nº 39/01 of March 8, 2001, adopted pursuant to the provisions of Article 50 of the American Convention, the Commission reached the conclusion that the acknowledgment of responsibility made by the State has full legal value in accordance with the principles of international law and places it under the obligation to redress the violations committed by it, pursuant to the provisions of the American Convention. The State, one year after having acknowledged its responsibility, has not carried out actions to eliminate the impunity that still covers the accessories of the extra-legal execution of Myrna Mack Chang. The Commission maintains that Guatemala still lacks a serious will to investigate and punish those responsible for the murder of Myrna Mack Chang (supra para. 14). 70. In its May 30, 2001 brief (supra para. 16), in response to Confidential Report 39/01 of the Commission, the State argued that: The Government of Guatemala […] explicitly and clearly stated that it would not address the causes of the delay, but rather it expressed its concern regarding said delay.