6 State must act consistently with its acknowledgment and in line with its international obligations, and comply with the Judgment rendered against it, providing reparation to the victims in fair proportion to the harm inflicted upon them and taking such measures as may be necessary to prevent similar facts from recurring. It should also be noted that the reparatory contents an acknowledgment may carry for the victims and their next of kin fade away with the lapse of time if the State authorities remain inactive, failing to repair the harm. 19. That, the Judgment on reparations issued in the instant case already established Molina-Theissen’s next of kin’s need for the State to serve justice, reveal the truth of the facts and find his remains. In this regard, the Judgment echoes the words of Ms. Emma Theissen-Álvarez Vda. de Molina, the victim’s mother, as follows: The State will never be able to repair the damage […], but certain measures may help alleviate her grief, such as: to know the truth about what they did to their son, to do justice, to investigate and find the masterminds and direct perpetrators of the facts.13 Likewise, the victim’s sister Ms. Ana Lucrecia Molina-Theissen stated, inter alia, that: Impunity continues in this case and in thousands of cases in Guatemala; this is very frustrating, as it means that the grief does not cease. She believes that there must be a change, a punishment, to help bear the grief more easily. […] Identification, trial and punishment of the direct perpetrators and masterminds would in part bring relief to the family, but it will not allow them to recover her brother. Adequate reparation would involve knowing the truth of what happened to Marco Antonio and to recover his remains. She also believes it essential to find out who committed those acts to try and to convict them.14 Lastly, another one of Marco Antonio's sisters, Ms. Emma Guadalupe Molina-Theissen, stated that: [s]he realizes that no reparation is complete and true because when they took her brother’s life they took her family’s life, but she believes that to attenuate what happened, somewhat, it is necessary for the State to reveal to the family what happened, where her brother is, and in this way to attain closure in the grieving process, and at least to feel that her brother’s remains will rest in peace. She also demands that justice be done, for those responsible to be punished.15 20. That the failure to receive justice is one of the main reasons why a victim resorts to the Inter-American system. Likewise, the order to prosecute and punish the perpetrators and find the truth about the facts is one of the essential decisions contained in the judgments of the court, as it entails moral satisfaction for the victims, allows them to emotionally overcome the violations, reestablishes social relations, helps avoid the repetition of the facts, helps eliminate the power the perpetrators might have, and entails Justice being served through the enforcement of the consequences that apply under the law, punishing those who so deserve and providing reparation to those to whom reparation is due. 21. That the Court has held that “[j]udicial proceedings that continue until their closing and that meet their purpose are the clearest indication of 0 tolerance towards human rights violations and contributes to provide reparation to the victims and shows society that justice has been made.”16 Guatemala has failed to provide such proceedings in the instant case. Quite to the contrary, it is still affecting the next of kin of MolinaTheissen. In addition, the State’s failure encourages the repetition of the violations, makes impunity even worse, discredits the Rule of Law and entails the failure to comply with international obligations. The considerations in this and previous paragraphs are illustrated by Ms. Ana Lucrecia Molina-Theissen’s statements at the private hearing of October 1, 2009 (supra Having Seen clause No. 5): 13 Cf. Case of Molina-Theissen v. Guatemala, supra note 5, para. 30(a). 14 Cf. Case of Molina-Theissen v. Guatemala, supra note 5, para. 30(b). 15 Cf. Case of Molina-Theissen v. Guatemala, supra note 5, para. 30(d). 16 Cf. Case of the “Street Children” (Villagrán-Morales), supra note 11, Considering clause No. 21.