procedural mistakes have been made, or, in sum, if the basis of the remedy is justified. The official or employee who does not adhere to the order shall be immediately relieved of his position or employment with no further procedures by the Mayor, who will communicate this destitution to the General Comptroller of the State and to the authority who must name the person’s replacement. 98. However, the two habeas corpus petitions filed were ineffective, since the authority in charge of initiating the search for Marco Bienvenido Palma Mendoza—in this case the Mayor—did not have the jurisdiction necessary to duly investigate the events, did not go to the place of the crime, and also did not order, with urgency, that minimum essential procedures be carried out that could have helped to locate the whereabouts of Mr. Mendoza. According to the O.I.D. Police Report of May 23, 1997, in addition to the son of Marco Bienvenido Palma Mendoza, other people who were at the scene of the crime may have observed the men who were in the pickup truck who kidnapped Mr. Palma. These persons, had they been asked, may have been able to offer, at least, more information about them, their identification, their possible connection with the Ecuadorian Armed Forces, the vehicle they used, and the direction in which it drove off, which could have all been indications used to determine Mr. Palma´s whereabouts. 99. The habeas corpus recourse should be the best method to guarantee liberty, monitor respect for human life, and prevent a person’s disappearance or the inability to determine the place of that person’s detention.91 The Commission notes, however, that the recourse was not effective and that it does not conform to the standards of the American Convention. 100. In terms of its effectiveness, the IACHR reiterates that the act of filing the petition did not cause the competent authorities—as established by the Ecuadorian Constitution—to carry out the minimum procedures necessary to discover immediately the whereabouts of Mr. Palma. In spite of the fact that there were several witnesses and that the events occurred in the eyesight of employees of a State agency (The Ecuadorian Professional Training Service), State authorities limited themselves to issuing orders that did not produce results nor did they help prevent the murder of Mr. Palma, which occurred five days after his kidnapping. 101. With respect to this case, the IACHR believes that the right to effective judicial recourse implies the correlative duty of State to undertake a serious search, employing all efforts possible to determine as soon as possible the whereabouts of the person whose disappearance or kidnapping has been reported by his or her family members. 102. In terms of the compatibility of the habeas corpus recourse with the American Convention, the inter-American system has already considered this issue, and the Ecuadorian State has already recognized in previous cases, that the habeas corpus recourse enshrined in Article 28 of the Constitution of Ecuador is incompatible with the Convention. This is because it establishes that the Mayor—an administrative authority—is the person charged with determining the legality or illegality of an arrest or detention. In fact, it must be a judge who can establish both formally and substantially whether a person has been appropriately detained in a legal system and whether any of the rights of the detained person has been violated. Mayors cannot have the authority to exercise this jurisdictional power.92 91 Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Case of Bámaca Velásquez Vs. Guatemala. Merit. Judgment of November 25, 2000. Ser. C. No. 70, para. 192. 92 Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Report No. 66/01, Case 11.992, Daría María Levoyer Jiménez, Ecuador, June 14, 2001, paras. 78-81.