report Memoria del Silencio, dedicated a section to the specific analysis of the “Case of Río Negro.”290 196. Thus, different State authorities have been aware of these facts and, despite this, no investigation has ever been opened, even though this is an obligation that the State must comply with ex officio. Therefore, after more than 30 years, these facts remain in total impunity, which has been defined by the Court as “the complete lack of investigation, pursuit, capture, prosecution and sentencing of those responsible for violations of the rights protected by the American Convention.”291 In these terms, it is clear that the State has failed to comply with its obligation to conduct an investigation ex officio into what happened during the massacres in the Río Negro chapel and at Los Encuentros.” Consequently, Guatemala is responsible for the violation of the rights recognized in Articles 8(1) and 25(1) of the American Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) thereof (infra para. 237). B.2. Fría Investigation of the massacres that occurred on Cerro Pacoxom and in Agua B.2.1. Procedural initiative of the victims 197. The investigation conducted into the facts that occurred on March 13, 1982, on Cerro Pacoxom and on September 14, 1982, in Agua Fría were opened following criminal complaints filed in 1993 and 1994, respectively, by victims of the massacres (supra paras. 92 and 93). According to testimony given by Jesús Tecú Osorio during the domestic proceedings, one of these complaints, the one related to the Pacoxom massacre, was filed despite threats. During the public hearing, Mr. Tecú Osorio also indicated that: “[…] When the exhumations were being performed in Río Negro, the commander of the Rabinal garrison called all the Río Negro survivors to a meeting at the garrison and […] they began threatening everyone, [saying that] if they got involved with the people who were promoting the exhumations they [would] kill them just as [what happened] to all those people in [the] clandestine cemeteries.” 198. Therefore, the Court observes that the investigation into the massacres referred to in this section began approximately 10 years after the facts occurred, and only after the victims themselves had filed complaints, rather than on the State’s initiative. In this regard, Jesús Tecú Osorio stated during the public hearing that they “have been re-victimized because [they,] the survivors, took the initiative, brought the evidence before the Public Prosecutor so that those responsible are punished […].” Thus, the Court considers that, although the State has made certain efforts to investigate the facts, most of the evidence has been provided by the victims,292 who have promoted certain measures, such as the exhumations that were performed, to which the Court will refer below (infra para. 218), as well as the identification and individualization of those presumably responsible. To a great extent, the momentum for the investigation has been left to the victims themselves. Consequently, the State is responsible for violating the rights recognized in Article 8(1) and 25(1) of the American Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) thereof (infra para. 237). 290 Cf. Report “Guatemala, Memoria del Silencio,” supra, volume VI, annex I, Illustrative Case No. 10 “Massacre and Elimination of the Community of Río Negro.” 291 Case of the “White Van” (Paniagua Morales et al.) v. Guatemala. Merits, supra, para. 97, and Case of Contreras v. El Salvador, supra, para. 128, footnote 193. 292 For example, the testimony provided by the victims themselves and by the accused. 73