D.2. Implementation of a control mechanism and logging system 119. The representatives asked the Court to order the State to do the following: “e.1. Implement an internal and external control mechanism, with sanctioning power, on arbitrary detentions based on racial profiling, with the participation of organizations that work on human rights and the rights of Afro-Argentine, African and Afro-descendant persons. The mechanism shall receive complaints from the persons impact and have the power to challenge and veto police promotions;” and e.2. Implement a system for documenting and keeping statistics on racial origin, records of questionable detentions, and criminal statistics, at all levels of the security forces, in order to monitor and identify those committing racial discrimination and acting with violence. The goal is to collect disaggregated data on the number of Afro-Argentines, Afro-descendants, and Africans detained.” 120. After acknowledging responsibility, the State did not specifically address this measure. However, it recognized the need to adopt measures to address the discrimination that continues to be a serious problem in Argentina. 121. This Court found that José Delfín Acosta Martínez was a victim of racial discrimination. The Court views positively the measures that the Argentine State has taken to recognize the systemic problem of racial discrimination. However, this Court finds it necessary to take measures to reveal and prevent police violence based on racial profiling. Therefore, it deems it pertinent to require the State to implement: i) a mechanism to collect the complaints of people who claim to have been arbitrarily detained based on racial profiling to produce a record of these situations and enable actions in response to the complaints; and ii) a system for documenting and keeping statistics on the Afro-descendant population in the country, as well as on the arrests indicated in point i) above, so as to tally the arrests of Afrodescendant persons and the complaints filed by them and compare them to the total population. The State shall publish this information annually in a corresponding report, ensuring that it is accessible to the general public, while keeping the identities of the victims confidential.161 Furthermore, the State must present an annual report to the Court in which it describes the actions taken in this regard for three years following implementation of the data collection systems. E. Other measures requested E.1. Measures of satisfaction 122. Regarding the request of the representatives for the creation of a “Commission” that produces a report based on which the State “initiates the pertinent formal processes to sanction the conduct of officials who have committed acts causing harm—by action and/or omission—to the investigation into the death of José Delfín Acosta Martínez: This means launching legal actions; complaints before the Council of the Magistracy if there was a judiciary official involved; a complaint before the Attorney General of the Nation if there is a prosecutor involved; or a complaint before the corresponding agencies if the aforementioned were not competent," as well as a request for "the dismissal from the police force of the officers who were involved and are still on active duty,” the Court finds that the delivery of this judgment and the reparations ordered in this chapter are sufficient and adequate to redress the violations suffered by the victims and does not find it necessary to order these measures. Cf. Case of López Soto et al. v. v. Venezuela. Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of September 26, 2018. Series C No. 362, para. 349; and Case of Azul Rojas Marín et al. v. Peru, supra, para. 252. 161 35