7 12. That in paragraph 119 of the above-mentioned Judgment on reparations rendered in the instant case, the Court pointed out that “[t]he public officials and private individuals who hamper, divert or unduly delay investigations tending to clarify the truth of the facts, shall be punished, rigorously applying in this regard the provisions of domestic legislation.” 13. That taking into consideration the allegations made by the State both in its reports and at the hearing, and the allegations made by the representatives and the Commission, both in their observations and at the private hearing, the Court notes that the delay and lack of procedural activity in most of the proceedings are evident, as the State has not achieved any progress in the investigations since 2002-2003 approximately. Therefore, the State has not proven that the facts of the case are being investigated through the criminal proceedings started in 2001 or through any other appropriate means as it should, pursuant to the applicable international rules and standards (supra Considering clauses 11 and 12). 14. That, therefore, the Court considers it essential to require the State to provide detailed information on the steps and procedures taken and to submit a working plan on the actions to be taken in order to comply with the obligation to investigate, identify and, if applicable, punish those responsible for the facts of the Caracazo. 15. That, in addition, paragraph 119 of the above-mentioned Judgment on reparations rendered in the instant case, sets forth that “[th]e State must ensure that domestic proceedings directed toward the investigation and the [eventual] punishment of those responsible for the facts in this case have the desired effects and, specifically, must not resort to measures such as amnesty, discontinuance and measures designed to eliminate responsibility.” In this regard, the Court referred to its decision in the case of Barrios Altos and pointed out that: […] all amnesty provisions, provisions on statutes of limitation and the adoption of measures designed to eliminate responsibility are inadmissible, because they are intended to prevent the investigation and punishment of those responsible for serious human rights violations such as […] torture; extra-judicial, summary or arbitrary execution; and forced disappearance, all of them prohibited as they violate non-derogable rights recognized by International Human Rights Law [...]. 16. That, the Court further recalls that the Political Constitution of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela itself in its Article 29 sets forth the inapplicability of statutes of limitations in the case of serious violations of human rights, under the following terms: The State is obliged to investigate and legally punish offenses against human rights committed by its authorities. Actions to punish the offense of violating human rights and war crimes shall not be subject 9 to statutes of limitations. 9 Political Constitution of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela.