amend article 320 of the Criminal Code. In addition to this initiative, there are other proposals to amend this article, which are before the Justice and Human Rights Committee for discussion and the issue of the subsequent opinion, and they will be discussed in the 2012-2013 legislative period. The State added in this regard that, recently, Congress had approved the United Nations International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance. The State mentioned that plenary decision 09-2009/CJ-116 contains parameters for jurisprudential interpretation, but the criminal chambers do not have to follow them precisely. Lastly, the State affirmed that amnesty laws Nos. 26,479 and 26,492 were not applied in the investigations conducted into the events and no evidence has been provided that any of the supposed omissions or the negligence denounced by the petitioners were justified by the fact that the amnesty laws were in force; thus the reference to them has no purpose. The State concluded by indicating that it considered that it was not responsible for the violation of the rights to judicial guarantees and judicial protection of Jeremías Osorio Rivera and his next of kin, and asked the Court to declare that it had not violated Articles 8 and 25 of the American Convention in relation to Articles 1 and 2 of this instrument and I and III of the Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearance of Persons. B. Considerations of the Court B.1. The obligation to investigate in cases of enforced disappearance 176. First, it is pertinent to recall that the systematic practice of enforced disappearance supposes the disregard of the duty to organize the State apparatus in order to ensure the rights recognized in the Convention, and that this produces the conditions of impunity so that this type of act is repeated. 284 Hence, the importance that the State adopt all necessary measures to investigate and punish those responsible, as appropriate; to establish the truth of what happened; to locate the victims’ whereabouts and advise the family members, and also to provide fair and adequate reparation, as appropriate. 177. The obligation to investigate human rights violations is one of the positive measures that the State must adopt to ensure the rights recognized in the Convention. 285 Thus, as of its first judgment, this Court has underscored the importance of the State’s obligation to investigate and to punish human rights violations, 286 which acquires special importance in relation to the severity of the crimes committed and the nature of the rights harmed. 287 178. This Court has considered that, once an enforced disappearance has occurred, it must be considered an illegal act that may result in the imposing of punishment on whosoever commits, instigates or conceals it, or in any way participates in its perpetration. Consequently, the Court has considered that, whenever there are reasonable grounds to suspect that a person has been subjected to enforced disappearance, a criminal investigation must be opened. 288 This obligation is 284 Cf. Case of Velásquez Rodríguez v. Honduras. Merits, supra, para. 158, and Case of Contreras et al. v. El Salvador, supra, para. 126. 285 Cf. Case of Velásquez Rodríguez v. Honduras. Merits, supra, paras. 166 and 176, and Case of Luna López v. Honduras, supra, para. 153 286 Cf. Case of Velásquez Rodríguez v. Honduras. Merits, supra, para. 166, and Case of the Massacres of El Mozote and nearby places v. El Salvador. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of October 25, 2012. Series C No. 252, para. 127. 287 149. Cf. Case of Goiburú et al. v. Paraguay, supra, para. 128, and Case of García Lucero et al. v. Chile, supra, para. 288 Cf. Case of Anzualdo Castro v. Peru. Preliminary objection, merits, reparations and costs, supra, para. 65, and Case of Gudiel Álvarez et al. (“Diario Militar”) v. Guatemala, supra, para. 241. 66