83 281. The Court approves the agreement on measures of satisfaction and the guarantees of non-repetition, made between Colombia and the representatives, inasmuch as the measures constitute a means to adequately redress the consequences of the violations established in this Judgment, are in line with this Court’s jurisprudence, and represent a step forward by Colombia towards compliance with the obligation to make reparations in accordance with Article 63(1) of the Convention. Therefore, the State must fulfill all of the obligations it assumed towards the reparation beneficiaries within the time frame and in the manner set forth in the agreement and pursuant to paragraph 282 of this Judgment. 282. With regard to the agreed upon measures for which the time frame depended upon the issuance of this Judgment, this Court orders that the first, fourth and seventh measures aimed at “honoring the memory of the victims” (supra para. 277. I.1, I.4 and I.7), as well as the measures concerning “the publication of the Inter-American Court’s Judgment” (supra para. 277.II), be implemented by the State within six months. 283. Finally, the Court does not consider it appropriate to grant the Commission’s request made in its final written arguments that the State be ordered to “hold a public ceremony acknowledging international responsibility” since, under the partial agreement on reparations and in the representatives’ final arguments, such a measure is not in dispute and its purpose would be achieved with the implementation of other agreed upon measures designed to honor the victims' memory and prevent repetition of events such as those in this case. * * * 284. In their final arguments, the representatives stated that they waived “[some of] the categories of reparations requested” in their brief containing pleadings and motions, which they deem to be “covered by the partial agreement” (supra para. 22). However, they mentioned the “issues of reparation in dispute” (supra para. 21). 285. The State alleged that “it has adopted measures [such as those the Court ordered in the 1996–1997 period] and on many occasions it has exceeded them”. 286. The Court shall establish four additional measures of satisfaction and guarantees of non-repetition in addition to those approved (supra para. 277 to 282), as it deems them necessary to adequately repair the consequences of the violations established in this Judgment, in accordance with Article 63(1) of the Convention. a) Obligation to investigate the events that resulted in violations in the instant case, and to identify, prosecute and punish those responsible 287. The Court has established in this Judgment that the domestic proceedings conducted in the present case have not constituted effective recourse to ensure true access to justice for the surviving victims and the next of kin declared to be victims; this requires proceedings within a reasonable time, the factual clarification of the events, the investigation and punishment of the perpetrators and reparation of the violations. For this reason, the Court held the State responsible for violating Articles 8(1) and 25 of the Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) thereof. 288. The Court established such violation, inter alia, because of the lack of due diligence in conducting the investigation, the threats to judges, witnesses and relatives, the obstacles