45 appointments and the creation of administrative bodies not involved with the judicial system, apart from the ineffectiveness of the Constitutional Tribunal ”178. Another widespread practice confirmed by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission was that the Attorney General’s Office did not comply with its duty to properly investigate into the crimes based on its lack of independence from the Executive Power179. 139. Finally, the representatives claimed that the State violated the principle to be assumed innocent to the detriment of Mr. Anzualdo Castro in view of the content of the decision to close the investigation of June 3, 2004. In this regard, inasmuch as this case does not deal with the innocence or guilt of Mr. Anzualdo Castro (supra para. 36) the representatives' argument is not admissible, since the presumption of innocence corresponds to “an accused person” and, in said investigation, he was not the accused, but precisely the victim. Without detriment to the foregoing, the Court notes that several state agencies linked Mr. Anzualdo Castro or his family to the group Sendero Luminoso, who were perceived by society and stigmatized by the State as “terrorists” or the next- of- kin of “terrorists”, with all the negative consequences this implies180. This led, in the practice, to close the investigation into his disappearance without having determined any responsible and carried out the necessary measures to determine his fate or whereabouts. 140. In conclusion, upon assessing the lack of objectivity with which the authorities acted when deciding to provisionally close the investigation, their attitude towards the victim, the lack of identification of the responsible, the testimonies taken at the request of the party, the lack of search for evidence at the place of the facts, the lack of investigation of the possible places where the victim could have been taken, the lack of verification of the registries at the detention centers and the manner in which the investigation was solved, allows to conclude that this first investigation was not seriously, effectively and thoroughly carried out. b) Regarding the investigations carried out as of the year 2002181 141. Regarding this second stage, the representatives argued that it was also characterized by the lack of due diligence, since there have been no progress in the investigations as of the year 2002, despite the fact there was new information about the facts. They alleged that “the transfer of the case from some prosecutor’s offices to other offices during the proceeding, the lack of coordination between them and the duplication of investigations have contributed to the lack of due diligence in the investigation.” According to the State, the different complaints filed with several instances prove that the State respects the right to effective judicial protection and due process. 178 Cf. Final Report of the CVR, 2003, volume VIII, General Conclusions, para. 123-131, available at http://www.cverdad.org.pe/ifinal/index.php 179 Cf. Final Report of the CVR, 2003, volume VIII, General Conclusions, para. 123-131, available at http://www.cverdad.org.pe/ifinal/index.php 180 Cf. mutatis mutandi, Case of the Miguel Castro- Castro Prison V. Perú. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Supra note 9, para. 359. 181 Investigation before the Office of the Special Provincial Prosecutor on Forced Disappearances, Extrajudicial Executions, and Clandestine Graves; Office of the Fifth Supra-Provincial Criminal Prosecutor (assigned number 50-2002); and the Office of the Third Supra-Provincial Criminal Prosecutor (assigned number 04-2007); as well as the Investigation before the Office of the Special Human Rights Prosecutor ; investigation informed by the State in its preliminary objection and investigation against former President Fujimori and extradition proceedings (case number 45-2003).