143. Regarding actions subsequent to the use of force, the Court has affirmed that, pursuant to the Basic Principles on the Use of Force, if injuries occur following the use of force, the necessary medical aid must be facilitated and rendered and relatives or close friends notified at the earliest possible moment. 184 In addition, a report on the situation must be prepared for administrative review and judicial control. 185 Similarly, the events must be investigated in order to determine the level and manner of participation of each of those who intervened, whether directly or indirectly, so that the corresponding responsibilities may be established 186 (infra para. 242). 144. The Court has noted that, following the incident in which Igmar Landaeta lost his life, the agents who shot him transported him to the Outpatient Clinic, taking approximately 20 minutes, and leaving him in the emergency ward, following which they withdrew without identifying themselves. According to the statement of the doctor who received the body of Igmar Landaeta, there were no signs of life (supra para. 64). 145. In this regard, the Court notes that the judgment of the Third Superior Criminal of November 11, 1997, established that: “In the opinion of the Superior Court, this constitutes a kind of behavior that it not in keeping with the regulations and functions of any police agent who participates in an incident such as the one we are examining, because when an incident in which a human being loses his life arises, any law enforcement agent should wait – either at the scene of the incident or, in this case, at the place where the deceased was left – for the arrival of the auxiliary unit of the courts of the Republic of Venezuela, such as the Technical Unit of the Judicial Police, to open the investigation to determine exactly how the events transpired.” 187 146. The Court finds that the actions of the State agents were not in keeping with the above-mentioned principles of due diligence and humanity that must be observed following the deployment of force. In particular, neither the autopsy report nor the death certificate indicate the exact time and/or moment of the death of Igmar Landaeta (infra para. 232). 188 However, if the second shot would have killed him immediately, as indicated by expert witness Baraybar, 189 the body should not have been manipulated or transported from the scene of the crime, because this could have drastically affected the collection of evidence. If he had required medical aid, the State agents should have obtained immediate trained ancillary care. If they had transported him alive, they should have delivered him to the competent medical authorities, identified themselves, explained what had happened, and prepared a report on the situation, supervised by an administrative and/or judicial official, and have notified the victim’s family (supra para. 143). All this has not been substantiated in the instant case, so that the State failed to provide assistance to Igmar Landaeta with due diligence and humanity. In addition, it did not investigate or penalize the said actions by administrative, disciplinary or judicial mechanisms. 184 Cf. Case of Nadege Dorzema et al., supra, para. 100, and Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials, supra, Principle 5 (c) and (d). 185 Cf. Case of Nadege Dorzema et al., supra, para. 100, and Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials, supra, Principle 6, 11 (f), and 22. 186 Cf. Case of Montero Aranguren et al. (Retén de Catia), supra, paras. 79 to 83, and Case of Nadege Dorzema et al., supra, para. 100. Cf. Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials, supra, Principles No. 6 and 22. 187 Cf. Ruling of the Third Superior Criminal Court of November 11, 1997 (annexes to the answering brief, folio 9379). 188 Cf. Certified copy of the death certificate of Igmar Landaeta (annexes to the answering brief, folio 9188), and Police record in which agent Idelgar Farrera registered the statement of Dr. Velmar Quintero of November 17, 1996 (annexes to the answering brief, folio 9111). 189 Cf. Testimony of expert witness José Pablo Baraybar of January 29, 2014 (merits file, folio 833). 38