71 193. Likewise, the next of kin of the victims of gross violations to human rights have the right to know the truth. Knowledge of the truth of the fact in cases of notorious violations of human rights such as those of the present case, is a inalienable right, an important means of reparation for the victims and their next of kin and it is a fundamental way of elucidation so that the society may develop its own mechanisms and the prevention of violations such as those of this case in the future.115 194. In the present case the Court established that, eleven years after the occurrence of the facts, the authors of the illegal and arbitrary deprivation of freedom, torture, cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment, and extrajudicial killing of Marco Antonio Servellón García, Rony Alexis Betancourth Vásquez, Orlando Álvarez Ríos, and Diomedes Obed García Sánchez have not been held responsible for said violations, thus the existence of impunity (supra paras. 125, 154, and 156). 195. In consideration of the violations declared, as well as of that said by the State, this Tribunal considers that the State must seriously comply with all the actions necessary to identify, prosecute, and, in its case, punish all the perpetrators and planners of the violations committed in detriment of Marco Antonio Servellón García, Rony Alexis Betancourth Vásquez, Orlando Álvarez Ríos, and Diomedes Obed García Sánchez in a reasonable period of time, for criminal effects and any other that could result from the investigation of the facts. For this purpose, as has been ordered by the Court in other cases,116 the State must remove, in a reasonable period of time, all obstacles and mechanisms of fact and law that help maintain impunity in the present case. 196. The victims’ next of kin or their representatives must have full access and capacity to act in all the stages and instances of the domestic criminal proceedings started in the present case, pursuant to domestic legislation and the American Convention. The results of these processes must be publicly diffused by the State, in a manner such that the Honduran society will know the truth about the facts of the present case.117 b) Publishing of the judgment 197. As has been ordered in other cases, as a satisfaction measure,118 the State must publish the Chapter on facts proven of this Judgment, without the corresponding footnotes, and the operative part of the same, once, in the Official Newspaper and in another newspaper of national circulation in Honduras. For these publications the Court establishes a six-month period, as of the notification of the present Judgment. 115 Cfr. Case of Ximenes Lopes, supra note 3, para. 245; Case of Baldeón García, supra note 3, para. 196; and Case of the Pueblo Bello Massacre, supra note 7, para. 266. 116 Cfr. Case of Montero Aranguren et al., supra note 12, para. 138. 117 Cfr. Case of Montero Aranguren et al., supra note 12, para. 139; Case of Baldeón García, supra note 3, para. 199; and Case of the Pueblo Bello Massacre, supra note 7, para. 267. Cfr. Case of Montero Aranguren et al., supra note 12, para. 151; Case of Ximenes Lopes, supra note 3, para. 249; and Case of the Ituango Massacres, supra note 3, para. 410. 118