76 principle of maximum disclosure, which establishes the presumption that all information is accessible, subject to restricted system of exceptions.301 200. Moreover, this Court has determined that all persons, including the next of kin of the victims of gross human rights violations, have the right to know the truth. As a consequence, the next of kin of the victims and society must be informed of all that occurred in regard to said violations.302 In the same sense, the right to know the truth has also been recognized in various instruments of the United Nations and by the General Assembly of the Organization of American States.303 201. For its part, the Inter-American Court has considered the content of the right to know the truth in its jurisprudence, in particular in cases of enforced disappearance. Since the case of Velásquez Rodríguez, the Court affirmed the existence of a “right of the next of kin to know the fate of the victims, and where possible, the location of their remains.”304 The Court also recognized that the right of the next of kin of the victims of gross human rights violations to know the truth is enshrined in the right to access to justice.305 Moreover, the Court has considered the obligation to investigate is a measure of reparation, given the need to remedy the violation of the right to know the truth in the specific case.306 Similarly, in the present case, the right to know the truth is related to the 301 Cf. Case of Claude Reyes et al., supra note 294, para. 92. 302 Cf. Case of 19 Tradesmen v. Colombia. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of July 5, 2004. Series C No. 109, para. 261; Case of Carpio Nicolle et al. v. Guatemala. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of November 22, 2004. Series C No. 117, para. 128, and Case of Myrna Mack Chang v. Guatemala. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of November 25, 2003. Series C No. 101, para. 274. 303 Cf. inter alia, Report of the Office of the High Commissioner of the United Nations for Human Rights. Study on the Right to the Truth, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/2006/91 of January 9, 2006; General Assembly of the OAS, Orders: AG/RES. 2175 (XXXVI-O/06) of June 6, 2006, AG/RES. 2267 (XXXVIIO/07) of June 5, 2007; AG/RES. 2406 (XXXVIII-O/08) of June 3, 2008; AG/RES. 2509 (XXXIX-O/09) of June 4, 2009, and AG/RES. 2595 (XL-O/10) of July 12, 2010, and Report of Diane Orentlicher, independant expert charged with updating the principles for the fight against impunity (E/CN.4/2005/102) of February 18, 2005. In the same sense, the former Commission on Human Rights of the United Nations, in the Updated Set of principles for the protection and promotion of human rights through action to combat impunity, de 2005, established, inter alia, that: i) “Every people has the inalienable right to know the truth about past events concerning the perpetration of heinous crimes and about the circumstances and reasons that led, through massive or systematic violations, to the perpetration of those crimes, (principle 2); ii) A people’s knowledge of the history of its oppression is part of its heritage and, as such, must be ensured by appropriate measures in fulfilment of the State’s duty to preserve archives and other evidence concerning violations of human rights and humanitarian law and to facilitate knowledge of those violations. Such measures shall be aimed at preserving the collective memory from extinction and, in particular, at guarding against the development of revisionist and negationist arguments, (principle 3); iii) Irrespective of any legal proceedings, victims and their families have the imprescriptible right to know the truth about the circumstances in which violations took place and, in the event of death or disappearance, the victims’ fate, (principle 4), and iv) States must take appropriate action, including measures necessary to ensure the independent and effective operation of the judiciary, to give effect to the right to know. Appropriate measures to ensure this right may include non-judicial processes that complement the role of the judiciary. Regardless of whether a State establishes such a body, it must ensure the preservation of, and access to, archives concerning violations of human rights and humanitarian law. Cf. in the Set of Principles for the protection and promotion of human rights through action to combat impunity (E/CN.4/2005/102/Add.1) of February 8, 2005. 304 Case of Velásquez Rodríguez. Merits, supra note 25, para. 181. 305 Cf. Case of Velásquez Rodríguez. Merits, supra note 25, para. 181; Case of Kawas Fernández, supra note 188, para. 117, and Case of Anzualdo Castro, supra note 122, parr. 118. 306 Cf. Case of Velásquez Rodríguez. Merits, supra note 25, para. 181; Case of Kawas Fernández, supra note 188, paras. 190, and Case of Anzualdo Castro, supra note 122, parr. 118.