their children,” Anatole and Victoria. 285 B. Obligation to investigate 259. The Commission asked that the State be ordered to investigate the whereabouts of Mario Roger Julien Cáceres and Victoria Lucía Grisonas Andrijauskaite fully, impartially, and effectively, and, where applicable, to take the measures necessary to identify and deliver their mortal remains to their next of kin in accordance with their wishes. It also asked that a criminal investigation be conducted into the human rights violations that took place in this case in order to “fully clarify the facts, identifying all those responsible, and administering punishment as appropriate.” 260. The representative asked that the State be ordered to “[investigate and prosecute,” within a reasonable time, the different “criminal matters that […] remain pending,” including the facts related to the “spoils of war.” It added that the State must inform the alleged victims of the procedures to be carried out and to allow them, where possible, to witness the work. 261. The State indicated that, in view of the activities undertaken to search for the remains of Julien Cáceres and what was indicated by the EAAF in this sense, “[it] would not be necessary to take measures in this regard.” B.1. Obligation to investigate the facts and identify, prosecute and punish, as appropriate, those responsible for the facts committed 262. In accordance with the violations declared in this Judgment, without prejudice to the progress made regarding the prosecution of the acts committed to the detriment of Ms. Grisonas Andrijauskaite and her children, Anatole and Victoria, the Court orders the State to continue with its investigation work to fully clarify what happened, in keeping with the findings of this Judgment (infra para. 286). 263. Regarding the facts to the detriment of Julien Cáceres, the competent authorities must solve cases 2261 and 2390 within a reasonable time. For these purposes, the State must take into account the considerations of this Judgment regarding the legal classification and subsequent application of the criminal offense of forced disappearance (supra para. 207). Finally, the State must investigate with due diligence, where appropriate, the issues surrounding the secret interment of the victim's body in the General San Martín District Municipal Cemetery. 264. Notwithstanding the considerations of this Judgment, the Court deems it necessary to recall that the category of crimes against humanity prevents the State from falling back on mechanisms such as amnesty laws or any other similar provision, ineligibility of criminal charges for ex post facto prosecution, res judicata, ne bis in idem, or any similar release of responsibility, to excuse itself from meeting its obligations.286 Likewise, the due diligence that must prevail in this matter means that the pertinent authorities are required to cooperate, for which purpose they must provide the competent bodies with all the information they require and refrain from taking actions that may obstruct the progress of the investigation process. 287 265. Lastly, given that this Judgment offered no opinion on investigation of the facts related to the “spoils of war,” the representative's request is inadmissible. Cf. Resolution issued by the Civil and Commercial Court No. 10 of San Martín, Province of Buenos Aires, on October 20, 2017, which appears in CUDAP case file: EXP-SO4:0033011/2012, Ministry of Justice and Human Rights (evidence file, volume IV, annex 7 to the answering brief, folios 3571 and 3572). 286 Cf. Inter alia, Case of Barrios Altos v. Peru. Merits, supra, Case of Almonacid Arellano et al. v. Chile, supra, pars. 114, 151, and 154; Case of La Cantuta v. Peru, supra, par. 114, and Case of Herzog et al. v. Brazil, supra, par. 232. 287 Cf. Case of García Prieto et al. v. El Salvador. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of November 20, 2007. Series C No. 168, par. 121, and Case of Garzón Guzmán et al. v. Ecuador, supra, par. 104. 285 67