44 documentation as well as the people172. The Court repeats that the passage of time has a directly proportionate relationship to the constraints – and, in some cases, the impossibility – of obtaining evidence or testimonies that help clarify the facts under investigation and even invalidates the practice of procedures for taking evidence in order to shed light on the facts of the investigation173, identify the possible perpetrators and participants and determine the possible criminal responsibilities174. It is worth mentioning that these resources and elements contribute to the effective investigation, but the lack of them does not exonerate state authorities from making the necessary efforts to comply with this obligation. 136. Following this line of thought, the Tribunal understands that the actions of the judicial authorities and the Attorney General’s Office, in this case, are framed in what the Truth and Reconciliation Commission established, as to the fact that the systematic practice of forced disappearance was also favored by the generalized scenario of impunity of the then prevailing severe violations of human rights, fostered and tolerated by the absence of civil liberties and the inefficacy of legal institutions to cope with the said systematic violations of human rights175. 137. In the chapter on the forced disappearances of its final report, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission noted that "the complaints of the next-of-kin of the disappeared people, in most of the cases, were followed by the inaction or not sufficient effective measures of the Judiciary and the prosecuting authorities; [which is] evidenced by their lack of willingness to investigate and even, hinder the investigation”176. And it cited, as way of example, the testimony rendered by the father of Kenneth, who stated that: […] the questions made by the prosecutor were “disturbing”, they have consulted with an attorney […] the attorney said nothing; in the statements, there were things that the sister of Kenneth had not said; they re-made the statement. The authorities did not really investigate177. 138. Furthermore, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission determined that the Peruvian Judiciary failed to adequately comply with its mission to combat impunity of the state agents who committed grave human rights violations, which contributed to that situation. This situation “was heightened after the coup d’ état of 1992", due to a "clear interference in the Judiciary based on massive dismissals of judges, provisional 172 Cf. Case of Myrna Mack Chang V. Guatemala. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of November 25, 2003. Series C No. 101, para. 180 and 181; Case of Tiu Tojín V. Guatemala., supra note 59, para . 77; and Case of La Cantuta V. Perú, supra note 58, para. 111. See also, Article X of the InterAmerican Convention on Forced Disappearance of Persons and Article 12 of the International Convention on the Protection of All People from Enforced Disappearance. 173 Cf. Case of Heliodoro Portugal V. Panamá, supra note 58, para. 150; Case of Perozo et al. V. Venezuela, supra note 6, para. 319. 174 In this regard, the expert witness Baraybar held that “… the main enemy is time, in a situation of forced disappearance or in any other; the best would be to conduct an immediate investigation, in forensic terms, into the facts after their occurrence, […] time deteriorates the things, time produces a series of phenomena that, basically, can alter the evidence until such item of evidence becomes useless; bones can be altered, by the effect of water, soil, whatever….” Cf. expert opinion rendered by expert witness José Pablo Baraybar Do Carmo at the public hearing held before the Inter-American Court on April 2, 2009. 175 Cf. Case of La Cantuta V. Peru, supra note 58, para. 92. 176 Final Report of the CVR, 2003, volume VI, chapter 1.2 Forced Disappearance of people by state agents, pages 110, available at http://www.cverdad.org.pe/ifinal/index.php 177 CVR, testimony record N° 100079 rendered by Felix Vicente Anzualdo Vicuña (record of evidence, volume V, appendix 31 to the application, pages 1844-1865).