with its obligation to adapt its domestic law to the Convention contained in Article 2 of this instrument, so that, since they were ab initio and in general incompatible with the Convention, the said “laws�� could not generate effects, do not have any effect currently, and cannot have effects in the future. 356 C. Conclusion 218. Based on the previous considerations, the Court concludes that the State violated the guarantee of the ordinary judge with regard to the investigation of the enforced disappearance of Jeremías Osorio Rivera before the military jurisdiction, so that Peru is responsible for the violation of Article 8(1) of the Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) of this instrument, to the detriment of Jeremías Osorio Rivera and his family members: Santa Fe Gaitán Calderón, Edith Laritza Osorio Gaytán, Neida Rocío Osorio Gaitán, Vannesa Judith Osorio Gaitán, Jersy Jeremías Osorio Gaitán, Juana Rivera Lozano, Epifanía Alejandrina Osorio Rivera, Elena Máxima Osorio Rivera, Porfirio Osorio Rivera, Adelaida Osorio Rivera, Silvia Osorio Rivera, Mario Osorio Rivera and Efraín Osorio Rivera. 219. In addition, the Court concludes that the investigations conducted in the ordinary jurisdiction were neither diligent nor effective to determine the whereabouts of Mr. Osorio Rivera, to establish what happened, and to identify and punish those responsible; moreover they failed to respect the guarantee of a reasonable time. Consequently, the Court concludes that, owing to the absence of an effective investigation of the facts, and the prosecution and punishment of those responsible, the State violated the right to judicial guarantees and to judicial protection, recognized in Articles 8(1) and 25(1) of the American Convention, in relation to Articles 1(1) of this instrument and I(b) of the Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearance of Persons, to the detriment of Jeremías Osorio Rivera and his family members: Santa Fe Gaitán Calderón, Edith Laritza Osorio Gaytán, Neida Rocío Osorio Gaitán, Vannesa Judith Osorio Gaitán, Jersy Jeremías Osorio Gaitán, Juana Rivera Lozano, Epifanía Alejandrina Osorio Rivera, Elena Máxima Osorio Rivera, Porfirio Osorio Rivera, Adelaida Osorio Rivera, Silvia Osorio Rivera, Mario Osorio Rivera and Efraín Osorio Rivera. 220. Even though more than 22 years have elapsed since the enforced disappearance of Mr. Osorio Rivera neither the truth about the events nor his whereabouts are known. Consequently, in this case, the State has still not satisfied the right of the family members to know the truth, which is subsumed in the right of the victim or his family members to obtain clarification of the violations and the corresponding responsibilities from the competent organs of the State, by the investigation and prosecution established in Articles 8 and 25(1) of the Convention. 357 221. Lastly, with regard to the existing normative framework, the Court concludes that during the period in which the amnesty laws were applied, the State failed to comply with its obligation to adapt its domestic law to the Convention and that, while article 320 of the Peruvian Criminal Code is not adapted to the proper definition of the offense in keeping with the international parameters, the State continues to be in non-compliance with Articles 2 of the American Convention and III of the Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearance of Persons. 356 Cf. Case of La Cantuta v. Peru, supra, para. 189, and Case of Anzualdo Castro v. Peru. Preliminary objection, merits, reparations and costs, supra, para. 103. 357 Cf. Case of Chitay Nech et al. v. Guatemala. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of May 25, 2010. Series C No. 212, para. 206, and Case of González Medina and family members v. Dominican Republic, supra, para. 263. 79