b) Use and apply the relevant and necessary national and/or international technical and scientific standards;231 c) Ensure that state officials and any other person who intervenes in or supports the search, exhumation and identification work has adequate safety guarantees, and initiate the required investigations if these people suffer any type of threat or attack; d) Incorporate, ex officio, any determination of the cause of death and injuries into the investigations that are already underway or those that are opened into the massacre in this case, for the pertinent effects; e) Inform the victims’ representatives in writing about the advances in the search, localization, identification, determination of the cause of death and prior injuries of the disappeared and presumably executed and, when applicable, return the remains of these people to their families (infra para. 270). Copies of these communications and the representatives’ answers must be presented to the Court to be considered at the stage of monitoring compliance with judgment.232 150. The mortal remains of the victims in this case must be returned to their next of kin following reliable verification of their identity and relationship, if possible, by DNA testing, as soon as possible and without any cost to the family. The State must also cover the funeral costs in agreement with the deceased’s family members,233 respecting their beliefs.234 The State must conclude all the exhumations within four years of notification of this judgment. If the remains of any victim in this case are not claimed by their next of kin within two years from the date they are found, individualized and identified, the representatives or the families directly must be informed. The State must inter those remains individually in a place agreed with the representatives, and record that they are unclaimed remains of people who died as a result of the facts of this case. The State must keep a detailed record of the place and date when the remains were found, the way in which they were identified, the possible manner of death, and the place of the subsequent interment. 235 D. Restitution 151. The representatives asked the Court to order the State to implement guarantees for the return of those who had been forcibly displaced. 152. Regarding this measure, the State recalled that, during the hearing, Francisco Batres had affirmed that the State had helped him to return and had even given him and other members of the community a plot of land; therefore, the State had complied with allowing the “members of the community” to return to the village. For example, those established in the United Nations Manual on the Effective Prevention and Investigation of ExtraLegal, Arbitrary and Summary Executions and its Model protocol for disinterment and analysis of skeletal remains. This protocol proposes guidelines and procedures for: (1) scene investigation; (2) laboratory analysis of skeletal remains; (3) preparation of the final report, and (4) repository to safeguard the exhumed remains. Cf. Case of the “Mapiripán Massacre” v. Colombia, supra, para. 305, and Case of Gelman v. Uruguay, supra, para. 259. 231 232 Cf. Case of the Rio Negro Massacres v. Guatemala, supra, para. 269. Cf. Case of Anzualdo Castro v. Peru, supra, para. 185, and Case of the Rio Negro Massacres v. Guatemala, supra, para. 270. 233 Cf. Case of Bámaca Velásquez v. Guatemala. Reparations and costs. Judgment of February 22, 2002. Series C No. 91, paras. 79 to 82, and Case of the Rio Negro Massacres v. Guatemala, supra, para. 270. 234 235 Cf. Case of the Rio Negro Massacres v. Guatemala, supra, para. 271. 45