were conducted and supervised by the Universidad Nacional Experimental de la Seguridad (UNES). 155. In this regard, the Court appreciates the creation of UNES and establishes that the State should continue the actions taken to date and implement, within a reasonable time, a compulsory program or course as part of the general and on-going training of all ranks of the Police of Aragua state. Among other aspects, this program should refer to the Inter-American Court’s case law on the prohibition of torture, personal integrity and liberty, the use of force, and the international human rights obligations derived from the treaties to which Venezuela is a party. E.2. Other measures of reparation requested a) Measures to ensure the effective accountability of state agents 156. The Commission asked the Court to require the State to take measures to ensure effective accountability in the criminal, disciplinary or administrative jurisdiction, in cases of alleged abuse of power by the State’s law enforcement agents. The representatives did not refer to this measure of reparation in their pleadings and motions brief. However, the Court takes notes that, in their final written arguments, they indicated the need to reiterate to the State the need to continue making an effort to monitor the actions of the police and the use of lethal force. The State indicated that, in recent years, it had also been taking measures to ensure the social auditing and accountability of police actions. It specified that it had adopted various regulatory instruments in this regard and supported the creation and functioning of community organizations for police control throughout national territory. 157. In this regard, the Court reiterates that, in the judgment in the case of the Barrios Family v. Venezuela, it had noted that the State had established principles for the use of force in the “Manual on differentiated and progressive use of force by the police”; that Venezuelan law regulated the control, storage and distribution of firearms, established a quarterly accountability procedure, and specified the circumstances in which police officers were authorized to carry such weapons. In addition, it noted that the State had created a reporting system entitled “Report to the immediate superior on use of force,” to be prepared, inter alia, when a police officer fired a weapon at any individual or group of individuals and, in such cases, an immediate investigation by trained personnel had to be conducted, and the official concerned assigned to administrative tasks until the investigation has taken a decision on his responsibility. Lastly, it indicated that Venezuelan law had established the obligation of police accountability and, to implement this obligation, a special periodic reporting system on police activities had been created.180 Consequently, as in the said case, the Court does not find it necessary to order a measure of reparation such as the one requested. b) Measures to ensure due diligence in investigations, in keeping with the relevant international standards 158. The Commission asked that the Court order the State to adopt legislative, administrative and other measures to ensure that investigations on the need for and proportionality of the use of lethal force by police agents are conducted with due diligence and in keeping with the relevant international standards. The victims’ representatives did not refer to this measure of reparation. The State found it pertinent to underscore that it had complied fully with the adoption of measures such as those contemplated by the Commission in its request. 180 Cf. Case of Barrios Family v. Venezuela, para. 346. -44-