94 considered beneficiaries of the reparations ordered by this Court. Lastly, also considered injured party are those persons who were deceased as of December 10, 1998, determined pursuant to that established in the present Judgment (supra paras. 181, 213, 225, and 244). 252. Notwithstanding the abovementioned, the Court recalls that it has set a period of 24 months as of notification of this Judgment, for those interested to present irrefutable evidence, in conformity with the legislation and domestic procedures, regarding “Batista,” “Gabriel,” “Joaquinzão,” José de Oliveira, Josias Gonçalves de Souza, Juarez Rodrigues Coelho, Sabino Alves da Silva, and “Sandoval,” so as to allow the State to identify them, and were applicable, consider them victims in the terms set by Law No. 9.140/95 and the present ruling, adopting the appropriate reparation measures in their favor. B. Obligations to investigate the facts, prosecute, and where necessary, punish those responsible and determine the whereabouts of the victims 1. Obligation to investigate the facts, prosecute, and where necessary, punish those responsible 253. The Commission requested that the Court orders the State to carry out, by means of the civil [ordinary] law jurisdiction, a comprehensive, effective, and impartial legal investigation of the enforced disappearances of the present case and of the execution of Mrs. Petit da Silva, in accordance with legal due process, in order to identify the intellectual and physical perpetrators of said violations and to criminally punish them. To this end, the State must take into account that said crimes are not bound by a statute of limitations and not subject to amnesties. As such, Brazil must adopt all the necessary measures to assure that the Amnesty Law and the secrecy laws do not continue representing an obstacle for the criminal persecution of gross violations of human rights. In addition, it requested the publication of said investigation in order for Brazilian society to be aware of what occurred during this period of its history. 254. The representatives requested the Court to order Brazil to investigate the facts, as well as to prosecute and punish all those responsible in a reasonable period of time, and to order the State not to use provisions of its domestic law, such as the statute of limitations, res judicata, non-retroactivity of criminal law, and ne bis in idem, or any other exceptions to responsibility, to be exempt from its obligation. The State must remove all the de facto and de iure obstacles that maintain the impunity of the facts, such as those related to the Amnesty Law. In addition, they requested that the Court orders the State to: a) judge all the proceedings in relation with gross violations of human rights in the ordinary justice system; b) allow all the next of kin of the victims full access and legitimacy to act in all the procedural stages of the case, pursuant to domestic laws and to the American Convention, and c) publicly and widely disclose the results of the investigations for the knowledge of Brazilian society. 255. The State did not specifically address the investigation of the facts and only noted that the analysis of the Amnesty Law cannot be separated from the moment in which it was enacted nor from the foundations from which it is established. On the other hand, it recalled that the decision of the Federal Supreme Court in the Non-compliance Action of the Fundamental Principle 153 considered the Amnesty Law to be entirely legitimate in light of the new constitutional legal system.