9 still in force. In this regard, paragraphs 90 and 105 of the Judgments on merits and reparations issued in this case, the Court considered that: [o]n the assumption that internal difficulties might prevent the identification of the individuals responsible for crimes of this kind, the victim's family still have the right to know what happened to him and, if appropriate, where his remains are located. It is therefore incumbent on the State to use all the means at its disposal to satisfy these reasonable expectations. In addition to this duty to investigate, there is also the duty to prevent the commission of forced disappearances and to sanction those responsible for them. These obligations on Perú shall remain in force until such time as they have been fully performed. 20. That the Court does not have information on the execution of judicial or humanitarian diligences, tending to reconstruct the facts following the arrest of Ernesto Castillo Páez and determine his whereabouts. During the proceedings before the Inter-American system the next of kin of the disappeared victim denounced that according to non-official information the youngster Castillo Páez “was murdered at a beach to the South of Lima and his body had been destroyed with explosives.”10 After the issuing of the judgment on reparations, the parties have not informed this Tribunal if this version of the events has been disproved o corroborated by the authorities. * * * 21. That the Inter-American Court values positively compliance with the second operative paragraph of the Judgment on reparations issued in the present case, in what refers to the criminal investigation of the facts and the identification and punishment of those responsible for the forced disappearance of Ernesto Castillo Páez. 22. That it is necessary that the State forward to the Inter-American Court precise information on the judicial and administrative acts or the acts of any other nature, carried out by its authorities in order to discover the whereabouts of the youngster Ernesto Castillo Páez. THEREFORE: THE INTER-AMERICAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS: in exercise of its authority to supervise compliance with its decisions pursuant to the provisions in Articles 33, 62(1), 62(3), 65, 67 y 68(1) of the American Convention on Human Rights, Articles 25(1) and 30 of the Statute of the Court, and Article 29(2) of its Rules of Procedure,11 DECLARES: 10 Cf. statement of Augusto Zuñiga Paz, offered before the Inter-American Court in public hearing on February 6 and 7, 1997. Cf. Case of Castillo Páez. Merits. supra note 3, para. 30(e). Rules of Procedure of the Court partially reformed in its LXXXII Regular Session, held on January 19-31, 2009. 11