16 Honduras, in a document of the same date, asserted that this confirmed the "well-founded suspicions that these murders and alleged disappearances are only an escalation in the attempts of anti-democratic sectors to destabilize the legally constituted system of our country." 74. On January 24, 1989, the President repeated the request to the Government that it inform the Court as soon as possible regarding: 1. The current state of the judicial inquiry into the assassinations of witnesses, José Isaías Vilorio, which took place on January 5, 1988, and of Miguel Angel Pavón Salazar, which occurred on January 14, 1988, "so that those responsible may be punished" (decisions of January 15 and 19, 1988). 2. The specific measures taken by the Government of Honduras "to make clear that the appearance of an individual before the Inter-American Commission or Court of Human Rights, under conditions authorized by the American Convention and by the rules of procedure of both bodies, is a right enjoyed by every individual and is recognized as such by Honduras as a party to the Convention." (Decision of January 19, 1988). No answer to this communication has been received. V 75. The Government raised several preliminary objections that the Court ruled upon in its Judgment of June 26, 1987 (supra 15-22). There the Court ordered the joining of the merits and the preliminary objection regarding the failure to exhaust domestic remedies, and gave the Government and the Commission another opportunity to "substantiate their contentions" on the matter (Fairén Garbi and Solís Corrales Case, Preliminary Objections, supra 22, para. 89). 76. The Court will first rule upon this preliminary objection. In do doing, it will make use of all the evidence before it, including that presented during the proceedings on the merits. 77. The Commission presented witnesses and documentary evidence on this point. The Government, in turn, submitted some documentary evidence, including examples of writs of habeas corpus successfully brought on behalf of some individuals (infra 123 (d)). The Government also stated that this remedy requires identification of the place of detention and of the authority under which the person is detained. 78. In addition to the writ of habeas corpus, the Government mentioned various remedies that might possibly be invoked, such as appeal, cassation, extraordinary writ of amparo, ad effectum videndi, criminal complaints against those ultimately responsible and a presumptive finding of death. 79. The Commission argued that the remedies mentioned by the Government were ineffective because of the internal conditions in the country during that period. It presented documentation of three writs of habeas corpus brought on behalf of Francisco Fairén Garbi and Yolanda Solís Corrales did not produce results. It also cited a criminal complaint that failed to lead to the identification and punishment of those responsible. In the Commission's opinion, those legal proceedings exhausted domestic remedies as required by Article 46 (1) (a) of the Convention. 80. The Court will first consider the legal arguments relevant to the question of exhaustion of domestic remedies and then apply them to the case.