of the investigation and trial of those responsible, in accordance with domestic law and the provisions of the American Convention. In addition, the results of the corresponding proceedings must be made public so that Argentine society can learn about the facts that are the subject of this case, as well as who is responsible for them. 171 166. In addition, the Court notes that the State has launched actions toward establishing the whereabouts of Mr. Iván Eladio Torres Millacura. Thus, taking into account the jurisprudence of this Court, 172 the Tribunal orders the State to continue with this search, and in doing so to make all efforts possible as quickly as possible. The Tribunal highlights that Mr. Torres Millacura disappeared almost eight years ago, and thus it is a fair expectation of his family members that the State take all effective actions to determine his whereabouts, and to adopt the measures necessary. 167. In addition, the Court notes that in the application’s list of petitions, the Commission asked the Court to order the State to carry out an investigation "with regard to the individuals who are part of the various State bodies that have been involved in the investigations and proceedings carried out with regard to the facts of this case," in order to determine responsibility for deficiencies "that have resulted in impunity” (supra paras. 110, 117 to 119, 121 to 125, and 132 to 133). However, in the considerations of fact and law in the application, the Commission did not make any arguments on this point. For this reason, the Court will not rule on this request. 168. Finally, with regard to the representatives’ request that the Court order the State to denounce the facts of this case before the International Criminal Court, this Tribunal does not have jurisdiction to order a State to bring a complaint against itself before any Tribunal or Court, whether national or international. Therefore, the representatives’ request is clearly inadmissible. C. Measures of satisfaction and non-repetition guarantees. C.1. Public acknowledgment of international responsibility, naming of a plaza or street after Iván Torres Millacura, and publication of the Judgment. 169. The Commission asked the Court to order the State "to carry out a public act of recognition of its [international] responsibility with regard to the facts of this case and the redress of the victim and his relatives, as well as officially name a plaza or street in the city of Comodoro Rivadavia after Iván Eladio Torres Millacura as a way of preserving historic memory.” They also requested "that certain acts of symbolic importance be held to guarantee the non-repetition of the crimes committed in this case." 170. The representatives expressly indicated that Mrs. Millacura Llaipén and her family "do not agree that the Argentine State should offer a public apology, publish the Judgment, erect a monument or name a street or plaza after Iván Eladio T[ores Millacura] as reparatory measures of satisfaction.” 171. The State did not make any specific reference to this point, however it held that it understands “that the acknowledgment of responsibility made [before the Court] as a sovereign and unilateral act constitutes in itself reparations for the damages caused in this case.” 171 Cf. Case of the Caracazo V. Venezuela. Reparations and Costs, supra note 170, para. 118; Case of Gomes Lund et al. (Guerrilha do Araguaia) V. Brazil, supra note 70, para. 257, and Case of Gelman V. Uruguay, supra note 76, para. 256. 172 Cf. Case of Velásquez Rodríguez V. Honduras. Merits, supra note 21, para. 181; Case of Gomes Lund et al. (Guerrilha do Araguaia) V. Brazil, supra note 70, para. 262, and Case of Gelman V. Uruguay, supra note 76, para. 259. 50