Prosecution Service took the necessary steps to execute the arrest warrants ordered against the individuals declared responsible in the […] criminal proceedings.” As a result, “on February 10, 2010, […] Manuel Pop Sun was arrested” and transferred to the Criminal, Drug Trafficking and Environmental Crimes Court of First Instance to give his first statement. A “commitment order and an indictment” were issued against him “on February 12, 2010, implicating him in proceedings for murder and human rights crimes.” In addition, on February 9, 2010, “Reyes Collin Gualip was arrested” and a commitment order and an indictment were issued against him on February 17, 2010, by the Criminal, Drug Trafficking and Environmental Crimes Court of First Instance, implicating him in proceedings for the crime of murder.” In addition, the State indicated that on “March 3, 2010, Carlos Antonio Carías López, who during the massacre held the rank of Second Lieutenant of the Guatemalan Army, came forward voluntarily and was implicated in the proceedings for murder and theft.” The State also reported that the “Public Prosecution Service had requested the extradition of Gilberto Jordán, Jorge Vinicio Sosa Orantes and Pedro Pimentel Ríos, who had been captured in the United States.” Regarding the other defendants implicated in the proceedings, the State advised that, to “date they have not yet been arrested, and it is presumed that they have left Guatemala; therefore, a red notice is being processed to locate them abroad.” The State also underscored that, given its importance, the case had been transferred to the High Risk Court of the Supreme Court of Justice where the proceedings were currently being conducted. 8. In addition, the State reported that on “February 23, 2010, the defense counsel of one the defendants presented an application for amparo as a result of the Criminal Chamber’s decision, claiming […]: ‘the rights to liberty and to defense, as well as the juridical principle of due process.´ [The claim] was decided on January 18, 2011 by the Constitutional Court in favor of the defendants. The State also indicated that the Asociación de Familiares de Detenidos y Desaparecidos de Guatemala [Association of the Next of Kin of Detainees and Missing Persons of Guatemala] (hereinafter “FAMDEGUA”) had filed an appeal for clarification and expansion against the decision of the Constitutional Court, considering that “the decision violated an international obligation of the State.” This appeal is pending a decision. The State reiterated, through the Presidential Coordination Commission for the Executive’s Policies on Human Rights (hereinafter “COPREDEH”), its willingness to comply with all the measures ordered by the Inter-American Court, but that the “Executive is unable to interfere in the decisions of the Constitutional Court.” Therefore, it was awaiting the ruling, which would be communicated to the Inter-American Court in due course. 9. The representatives observed that, regarding the “reactivation of the arrest warrants and the arrests, […] even though two of the defendants had been arrested — largely through the insistence and collaboration of the representatives at the domestic level — and another one turned himself in voluntarily, since then (around March 2010), no further sustained and serious efforts had been made to discover the whereabouts of the other individuals who had been found responsible and arrest them […], either on or outside Guatemalan territory.” They indicated that the “lack of diligence in the immediate and conscientious search for those responsible, especially those of higher rank in the army, only make the possibility of discovering the truth more distant and justice illusory.” In addition, they observed that, although the State indicates that it has “requested the extradition of several of those responsible captured in the United States, […] this request has not been made effective.” They considered it important that “the State forward this Court updated information on the progress of the requests for extradition regarding the three defendants who are in the United States, and the other defendants who were abroad.” 4