41 108. In short, each time there is reasonable cause to suspect that a person was subject to an enforced disappearance an investigation must be initiated.138 This obligation is independent from the filing of a complaint, given that in cases of enforced disappearance, international law and the general obligation to guarantee require the obligation to investigate the case ex officio, without delay, and in a serious, impartial, and effective manner. This is a fundamental and determinant element for the protection of certain rights affected by such situation.139 In any case, every State authority, public official or individual, that has had notice of acts of the enforced disappearance of persons, must immediately report said facts.140 109. For an investigation to be effective, the State must establish the appropriate normative framework to develop the investigation, which implies regulation in its domestic legislation the crime of enforced disappearance as an autonomous crime, given that the criminal prosecution is an appropriate instrument to prevent future violations of human rights of this nature.141 Moreover, the State must guarantee that no normative or other type of obstacles prevent the investigation of said acts, and where applicable, the punishment of those responsible. 110. Based on the foregoing, it can be concluded that acts which constitute enforced disappearance are of a continuous or permanent nature, and that its consequences involve multi-offensive violations to the human rights recognized in the American Convention while the whereabouts of the victim are not determined or the bodily remains not found, to which, States have the corresponding duty to investigate, and eventually, punish those responsible, pursuant to the obligations derived from the American Convention.142 111. As such, in the present case, the analysis of enforced disappearances should encompass the facts presented for the consideration of the Court, in their entirety.143 Only in this manner, is the legal analysis of this phenomenon consistent with the complexity of the human rights violations it entails,144 with its continued or permanent nature, and with the need to consider the context in which the facts occurred, so as to analyze the prolonged effects in time and fully understand the consequences,145 taking into account the corpus juris of the Inter-American and international systems of protection. 146 138 Cf. Case of Radilla Pacheco, supra note 24, para. 143; Case of Chitay Nech et al., supra note 25, para. 92, and Case of Ibsen Cárdenas and Ibsen Peña, supra note 24, para. 65. 139 Cf. Case of the Pueblo Bello Massacre v. Colombia. Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of 31 de enero de 2006. Series C No. 140, para. 145; Case of Chitay Nech et al. v. Guatemala, supra note 25, para. 92, and Case of Ibsen Cárdenas and Ibsen Peña, supra note 24, para. 65. 140 Cf. Case of Anzualdo Castro, supra note 122, para. 65; Case of Chitay Nech et al., supra note 25, para. 92, and Case of Ibsen Cárdenas and Ibsen Peña, supra note 24, para. 65. 141 Cf. Case of Gómez Palomino v. Perú, supra note 126, paras. 96 and 97; Case of Radilla Pacheco, supra note 24, para. 144, and Case of Ibsen Cárdenas and Ibsen Peña, supra note 24, para. 66. 142 Cf. Case of Radilla Pacheco, supra note 24, para. 145, and Case of Ibsen Cárdenas and Ibsen Peña, supra note 24, para. 67. 143 Cf. Case of Heliodoro Portugal, supra note 23, para. 112; Case of Chitay Nech et al., supra note 25, para. 87, and Case of Ibsen Cárdenas and Ibsen Peña, supra note 24, para. 67. 144 Cf. Case of Heliodoro Portugal, supra note 23, para. 150; Case of Chitay Nech et al., supra note 25, para. 87, and Case of Ibsen Cárdenas and Ibsen Peña, supra note 24, para. 68. 145 Cf. Case of Goiburú et al, supra note 130, para. 85; Case of Chitay Nech et al., supra note 25, para. 87, and Case of Ibsen Cárdenas and Ibsen Peña, supra note 24, para. 68. 146 Cf. Case of Radilla Pacheco, supra note 24, para. 146, and Case of Ibsen Cárdenas and Ibsen Peña, supra note 24, para. 68.