83 proper investigation of the events and judicial proceedings,” and also that the investigation should include “a perspective of gender and the human rights of women,” so that the State should “establish specific lines of investigation with regard to the acts of violence committed against the victim.” Lastly, it asked that “[t]he results of the investigations be publicized widely, so that Guatemalan society is informed of them.” 249. The State “reiterate[d] that it had carried out a thorough investigation to clarify María Isabel’s murder and that, unfortunately, it had not been able to identify the presumed perpetrator or perpetrators.” Nevertheless, it stated that: It would keep the investigation open, while it considers that it is legally possible to obtain a positive result, and if this happens, it will prosecute and punish those responsible, if and only if, it is possible to establish the participation of one of the suspects in the tragic death of the child. B.2) Considerations of the Court 250. The Court considers that the State is obliged to combat impunity by all available means, because impunity encourages the chronic repetition of the violation of human rights.343 The absence of a complete and effective investigation into the events constitutes a source of additional suffering and anguish for the victims, who have the right to know the truth of what happened.344 251. Consequently, the Court establishes that the State must conduct the investigation properly and, when appropriate, initiate the corresponding criminal proceedings and, if pertinent, any others that are required to identify, prosecute and punish, as appropriate, those responsible for the abuse and deprivation of the life of the child María Isabel Veliz Franco, in keeping with the guidelines in this Judgment, in order to avoid the repetition of acts that are the same or similar to those of this case. This investigation should be conducted with a gender-perspective, follow up on specific lines of investigation related to sexual violence, provide the victim’s family members with information on progress in the investigation in accordance with domestic law, and ensure that they can participate effectively in the criminal proceedings. In addition, the investigation should be conducted by officials trained in similar cases and in attending to victims of gender-based violence and discrimination. Lastly, it should be ensured that those in charge of the investigation and of the criminal proceedings, as well as any other persons involved as witnesses, expert witnesses or members of the victims family, have satisfactory guarantees for their safety. C. Measures of satisfaction 252. International case law and, in particular that of the Court, has established repeatedly that the judgment constitutes per se a form of reparation.345 Nevertheless, based on the circumstances of the case and the harm to the victims arising from the violations of the American Convention that have been declared, the Court finds it pertinent to examine the arguments of the Commission and of the parties concerning the award of measures of satisfaction. C.1) Arguments of the Commission and of the parties 253. The Inter-American Commission asked, in general, that the State “make full reparation to the next of kin of María Isabel Veliz Franco for the human rights violations.” However, it did not submit any explicit request as regards the measures of satisfaction. 343 Cf. Case of the “White Van” (Paniagua Morales et al.). Merits, supra, para. 173, and Case of Liakat Ali Alibux, supra, para. 42. 344 Cf. Case of Heliodoro Portugal v. Panama. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of August 12, 2008. Series C No. 186, para. 146, and Case of Osorio Rivera and family members, supra, para. 288. 345 Cf. Case of Neira Alegría et al. v. Peru. Reparations and costs. Judgment of September 19, 1996. Series C No. 29, para. 56, and Case of Liakat Ali Alibux, supra, para. 147.