10. The representatives also stressed that it is “essential that the State […] coordinate opportunely with the international police intelligence organizations and those of other States in order to bring the individuals who have already been captured to justice for these grave acts, as well as those who are still fugitives from justice.” In addition, they observed that it is especially important “to explore immediately lines of inquiry that take into consideration the pattern of systematic human rights violations at the time the facts occurred […], and that they cover all the facts of the massacre.” The representatives asked the Inter-American Court to “require the State to report on the measures it has adopted to guarantee the right to life and integrity of all those involved in the investigations, and to forward a report that includes a “timetable of the different steps taken in the investigation and those that are pending, as well as the resources assigned to conduct them.” Similarly, the representatives observed “with concern that the State has failed to provide any information regarding the measures taken to analyze the possible irregularities and violations committed during the investigation.” Therefore, they considered it important to reiterate “that the effective and diligent investigation of the facts must cover, among other factors, the intimidation and threats against the victims’ next of kin, witnesses and other procedural subjects.” They also asked this Court to “urge the State to present information on the measures it has adopted and will adopt to remove the de facto and de iure obstacles that maintain impunity in this case […]. 11. Regarding the appeal admitted by the Constitutional Court of Guatemala on January 18, 2011, in favor of nine of the defendants, against the decision issued on February 8, 2010, by the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice, the representatives indicated that, given the incongruity of the ruling, they had filed a request for clarification and expansion of the decision. They also observed that “the result of the decision of the [Constitutional Court of Guatemala] is to paralyze once again the process of investigating the grave acts that resulted in these international proceedings.” Therefore, the representatives reiterated that this Court should summon the parties to a hearing on the impunity of several cases, including this one. 12. The Commission took note of the information forwarded by the State and appreciated the efforts made to reactivate the domestic proceedings and to execute the pending arrest warrants. However, it “consider[ed] that the State should report on its follow-up on the corresponding extradition requests, notifications, and other procedures, on and outside Guatemalan territory to determine the identification and possible prosecution of those responsible. In addition, it indicated that “it is not possible to discern the actions taken [by the State to comply with the ninth operative paragraph].” Furthermore, from the information forwarded, it is not possible to infer “which of the crimes ascribed to them is specifically related to this aspect of the judgment,” and there is no indication of the level of participation of those allegedly responsible with regard to the obstruction of justice in this case. Lastly, the Commission considered that “this aspect of the judgment represents an obligation, which although related to the [eighth operative] paragraph, must be assumed by the State independently, because the obligation to investigate and punish does not only cover the acts that occurred during the massacre, but also the irregularities and delays in the subsequent judicial proceedings, and the acts of harassment perpetrated and tolerated by the State agents, which have prolonged impunity in the case.” 13. Based on the information provided by the State and the observations presented by the representatives and the Commission, the Court assesses positively all the efforts made and measures taken by the State to conduct the investigation into the facts of the instant case, which, owing to its importance, was forwarded to the High 5