8 currently pending in connection with this case.” Following publication of said Decree, “via Resolution 2214 of August 12, 2008[,] the Minister of Justice, Security and Human Rights authorized the Human Rights Secretary to act as complainant in the proceedings in which the commission of crimes against Walter David Bulacio is investigated.” Thus, “[g]iven the courts’ refusal to reinstate the family as [complainants], […] the Human Rights Secretary’s Office has already made its appearance and requested that the next of kin of Walter Bulacio be reinstated in [such] capacity.” In this regard, on September 24, 2008, the Ministry of Justice, Security and Human Rights sent a letter to the Attorney General requesting that “the best efforts be made in order to guarantee that the victims’ next of kin will have full access and be able to act at all stages [and] levels [of the proceedings].” 25. That, as regards to Walter Bulacio’s mother’s reinstatement as complainant in the domestic proceedings, the representatives noted that she “remains alien to any procedural alternative, is not notified of any developments in the case and has not been recognized standing to file petitions in the case or even to verify them.” Furthermore, the representatives reported that “on September 2, 2008, Criminal Investigation Court No. 49 […] once again dismissed the motion made by the counsel for Walter Bulacio’s family, denying their reinstatement to the case as affected private parties.” Said criminal Court noted that “their [the next of kin of the victim’s] lack of standing to participate in the trial and in connection with the crime of illegal imprisonment that led to the investigation was already ruled on [on June 6, 2002] by the higher Court[, which applied Section 170 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,] in the context of the ancillary proceedings instituted by the defense.” In this regard, said criminal Court concluded that “the ruling ha[d] become final.” The representatives described as inadmissible the fact that “[p]aradoxically, in that same ruling, the judge allow[ed] the federal government – acting through the Human Rights Secretary’s Office- as complainant, on the understanding that a matter of public interest is at stake in the case.” The representatives appealed the ruling of September 2, 2008, and the appeal is still pending. 26. That, on the subject, the Commission noted that “for more than two decades now, international bodies for the protection of human rights have recognized the importance of the right of the victim or the victim’s next of kin to be involved in the domestic proceedings as complainant to supplement or potentially substitute for the prosecutorial action that is required of the State.” Moreover, the Commission stated that “[a]t the hearing on monitoring compliance with the [J]udgment […] held in Montevideo, Uruguay, on August 14, 2008, the representatives of the victim and the victim’s next of kin advised the Court that, for several years now, they have not been allowed even to see the court case file under the pretext that they are not parties to the case.” Accordingly, the Commission asked the Court to instruct the State to provide an explanation on the possibility of overturning the decision rendered on September 2, 2008 by Criminal Investigation Court No. 49 of the City of Buenos Aires, as such decision is incompatible with the orders contained in the Court's Judgment. 27. That, according to the parties (supra Considering clauses Nos. 24, 25 and 26), as a result of the aforementioned decisions of June 6, 2002, and September 2, 2008, the State has refused to reinstate Walter Bulacio’s next of kin as “harmed next of kin” in the criminal proceedings, based on the declaration of their lack of standing to take part in the proceedings under Section 170 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in force. 28. That the State has failed to comply with its obligation to give the victim’s next of kin full access to, and allow them to be able to act at, all stages and levels of the investigations, in accordance with the domestic laws and regulations and the provisions of the Convention;