would be set for holding the “conclusive hearing” and to open the “oral, public and adversarial proceedings in which the guilt and/or innocence of the accused w[ould] be established.” 8. The representatives indicated that “it has not been determined [what happened] as regards the torture and ill-treatment [suffered by] Rainer Ibsen Cárdenas and José Luis Ibsen Peña.” Regarding criminal case file 37/2000 analyzed in the Judgment (supra having seen paragraph 1 and considering paragraph 5), they advised that “no international arrest warrant has been issued” for Juan Antonio Elio Rivero. They also stated that Justo Sarmiento Alanes was currently under house arrest, even though, according to the representatives, a ruling on an application for constitutional amparo established that Mr. Sarmiento Alanes “should be serving a prison sentence.” 9. Regarding the proceedings initiated by the complaint filed by Tito Ibsen (supra considering paragraphs 6 and 7), the representatives asserted, in a brief of November 14, 2011, that the competent authorities had not conducted investigations ex officio and that the victims had not been informed of the proceedings. In addition, in a brief of March 13, 2013, the representatives indicated that, contrary to the information provided by the State, these proceedings were only investigating the forced disappearance and murder of Rainer Ibsen Cárdenas,” and not the facts that involved José Luis Ibsen Peña. Moreover, in briefs of September 28, 2012, and March 13, 2013, the representatives asserted that “the due notification of the formal charges had not been made” to Justo Sarmiento Alanes and Mario Adett Zamora. 10. The Commission “appreciate[d] the efforts deployed to apprehend one of those convicted and await[ed] more detailed information on the others.” Also, with regard to the ongoing investigations, the Commission indicated that it “hoped that […] the problems that maintain impunity on several aspects of the case can be overcome; […] that the investigations are conducted with the greatest speed and diligence, and that the State continues to provide detailed information on any progress made.” 11. From the information provided by the parties, the Court observes that, currently, three people have been convicted in relation to the violations committed against Mr. Ibsen Peña, and that another proceeding has been opened based on charges presented against two individuals in order to clarify the facts of the case and to establish the corresponding responsibilities.9 The Court appreciates the steps taken by the State in order to comply with this measure of reparation. However, regarding criminal case file 37/2000 (supra considering paragraphs 5 and 8), the Court requests that the State provide further information concerning the actual situation of each of the individuals convicted, as well as a copy of the pertinent documentation. In addition, it requests updated information on the proceedings opened before the Fourth Criminal Trial Court of La Paz (supra considering paragraphs 6, 7 and 9), and urges the State to make the corresponding notifications in order to press ahead with the determination of the responsibility or innocence of the accused.                                                              9 Cf. Sentencing orders against Justo Sarmiento Alanes, Juan Antonio Elio Rivero and Oscar Menacho Vaca of October 27, 2010 (file on monitoring compliance, tome I, folios 131 and 132), and Charges brought by the Public Prosecution Service against Adett Zamora Claros and Justo Sarmiento Alanes on July 20, 2012 (file on monitoring compliance, tome II, folio 1060). 5