investigation on its own within a reasonable time and because it has not conducted a serious search to establish the whereabouts of Mr. Garzón Guzmán, incurring also in a violation of the right to know the truth. 103. Given that criminal proceedings have been opened for the forced disappearance of Mr. Garzón Guzmán and in view of its consistent case law,95 the Court orders that the State must continue, effectively and with due diligence, the ongoing investigations and the criminal proceedings. To do this, it must open the lines of investigation that are necessary in order to identify, prosecute and, if applicable, punish those responsible for the forced disappearance of Mr. Garzón Guzmán within a reasonable time and with the purpose of establishing the truth of what had occurred. For this, the State must take all relevant measures to remove the obstacles that maintain impunity in this case. Due diligence in the investigation implies that all of the State authorities are obligated to collaborate in gathering evidence and, therefore, they must provide the judge, prosecutor or other competent authorities with all of the information and must abstain from actions that might obstruct the investigative process.96 104. Specifically, the State must ensure that the investigations take into account every hypothesis of what might have occurred, placing special attention on those that have been recognized by the State within the framework of these proceedings; namely, that Mr. Garzón Guzmán was the victim of a forced disappearance committed by State agents. In addition, the State must ensure that the following criteria are observed: 97 a. conduct the relevant investigation with respect to the present case, without any omissions in the collection of evidence and in the follow-up of the logical lines of investigation; b. investigate with due diligence, including all the elements involved in the forced disappearance; c. identify and individualize the presumed intellectual and material perpetrators of the forced disappearance of the victim; d. ensure that the competent authorities conduct the pertinent investigations ex officio and that they have available and use all the necessary logistical and scientific resources to collect and process the evidence and, specifically, that they have the authority to examine the relevant documentation and information in order to investigate the denounced acts and to conduct, in a timely manner, the essential actions and inquiries to shed light on what occurred to Mr. Garzón Guzmán, e. in view of the gravity of the events, the State must not apply laws of amnesty nor provisions of prescription, nor employ reasons to exclude responsibility, which in reality are excuses to impede the investigation. 105. In accordance with its consistent case law, the Court reiterates that the State must Cf. Case of Velásquez Rodríguez v. Honduras. Merits, supra, para. 174 and Case of Guachalá Chimbo et al. v. Ecuador. Merits, Reparations and Costs, supra, para. 199. 95 Cf. Case of Myrna Mack Chang v. Guatemala. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of November 25, 2003. Series C No. 101, para. 277 and Case of Vásquez Durand et al. v. Ecuador. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs, supra, para. 203. 96 Cf. Case of Vásquez Durand et al. v. Ecuador, Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs, supra, para. 203. 97 25