52 reluctance to locate and scientifically identify the remains of Rainer Ibsen Cárdenas "were false and groundless.” 157. The Court notes that the “National Commission for Investigation of Forced Disappearance” was composed of different representatives of the public branches as well as of civil society. It had the power to “analyze, investigate, and determine the situation of citizens who disappeared in the National Territory.” In a document presented by the State before the Inter-American Commission during the processing of the case before it, the State asserted that said Commission “received 155 complaints of [f]orced [d]issapearances committed between 1967 and 1982, [and that] even though the remains of some of the disappeared persons could be located, the cases were not conclusively investigated.” Said document also indicates that this Commission “performed its duties from 1982 to 1984 and was dissolved without achieving conclusive investigations or issuing a Final Report.”199 In this Judgment, it has been mentioned that during 1983 the National Commission for Investigation of Forced Disappearances announced the discovery of a common grave which apparently contained the remains of Rainer Ibsen Cárdenas and another fourteen disappeared persons (supra para. 84). 158. In this respect, the Court considers it is appropriate to reiterate, as it has done in other cases, that the “historical truth” documented in special reports, or tasks, activities and recommendations issued by special commissions, like the one in the instant case, do not complete or substitute the State’s obligation to establish the truth and investigate crimes through judicial proceedings.200 This Tribunal has established that the obligation to investigate the facts, prosecute, and, if applicable, punish those responsible for a crime that constitutes a human rights violation, is an obligation that derives from the American Convention,. and that criminal liability must be determined by the competent judicial authorities, following strictly the rules of due process established in Article 8 of the American Convention.201 159. Based on the foregoing, without undermining the efforts made by the Bolivian State and the procedures conducted by the National Commission for Investigation of Forced Disappearances, in particular in relation to the search for the remains of Mr. Rainer Ibsen Cárdenas, the Court considers that the analysis regarding the State’s duty to initiate investigations ex officio must be limited to the proceedings conducted at the judicial level. 160. In this respect, this Judgment has already established the international responsibility of the State for the human rights violations committed against Messrs. Rainer Ibsen Cárdenas and José Luis Ibsen Peña (supra para. 122), who were deprived of liberty and transferred to different detention centers in Bolivia where they were allegedly subjected to torture, among other things, and then to forced disappearance, while in the State's custody. Based on the foregoing, it is reasonable to sustain that the State, at all times, was aware of these facts. However, the investigation into such facts was not initiated until the year 2000, as the result of the request filed by Rebeca Ibsen Castro to join an existing 199 Cf. Summary of the presentation for the hearing of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights on Forced Disappearances, prepared by the Ministry of Justice, on July 9, 2007 (case file of appendixes to the application, appendix 11, folio 1751). 200 Cf. Case of Almonacid-Arellano et al. v. Chile. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of September 26, 2006. Series C No. 154, para. 150; Case of Radilla Pacheco v. Mexico, supra note 8, para. 179, and Case of the “Las Dos Erres” Massacre v. Guatemala, supra note 7, para. 232. 201 Cf. Case of Huilca-Tecse v. Peru. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of March 3, 2005. Series C No. 121. para. 106, and Case of Radilla Pacheco v. Mexico, supra note 8, para. 47.