responsibilities, and impose the punishments and consequences provided by law.126 This obligation must be fulfilled diligently and within a reasonable time. Moreover, the State must ensure that the investigation includes the identification of the officials alleged to be responsible for the facts relating to the fire at the San Pedro Sula prison. 129. The Court recalls that the obligation to investigate is an obligation of means and not results that must be assumed by the State as its inherent legal duty and not as a mere formality preordained to be ineffective, or as a measure taken by private interests that depends on the procedural initiative of the victims or their next of kin, or upon their offer of proof.127 130. In this regard, the State must guarantee full access and legal standing to the next of kin of the victims at all stages of the proceedings. The purpose of this participation is access to justice and knowledge of the truth of what happened.128 E. Compensation and opportunities fund 1. Pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage 131. In section 6(d) “Mechanisms and Procedures” of the friendly settlement agreement, the parties asked the Court to preserve the confidentiality of the amounts of the compensation, expenses and costs established in the fifth operative paragraph of the agreement, for security reasons (supra para. 77). Based on this request, and taking into account the reason for it, the Court will not record these amounts in this Judgment. 132. In the friendly settlement agreement the State and the representatives agreed upon a global amount for compensation, broken down into an amount for pecuniary damage, expenses and costs, and another amount for “non-pecuniary damage,” to be paid over two fiscal exercises. In addition, the amount corresponding to the “pecuniary damage […] will constitute the compensation and opportunity fund for the next of kin of the [107] individuals deprived of liberty who lost their life in the San Pedro Sula Prison […]; it will be regulated by setting up a trust fund, the regulations of which will be drawn up by the San Pedro Sula Diocese of the Catholic Church. The categories of the trust fund will be calculated on a percentage basis for the education, health, and funeral expenses of the families of the victims.” 133. In its case law, the Court has developed the concept of pecuniary damage and the situations in which it should be compensated. This Court has established that pecuniary damage supposes “the loss of or detriment to the income of the victims, the expenses incurred as a result of the facts, and the consequences of a pecuniary nature that have a causal relationship to the facts of the case.”129 126 Cf. Case of Velásquez Rodríguez, Merits, supra note 10, para. 174, and Case of Contreras et al., supra note 18, para. 185. 127 Cf. Case of Velásquez Rodríguez. Merits, supra note 10, para. 177, and Case of González Medina and family, supra note 13, para. 203. 128 Cf. Case of El Caracazo v. Venezuela. Reparations and costs. Judgment of August 29, 2002. Series C No. 95, para. 118, and Case of Contreras et al., supra note 18, para. 187. 129 Case of Bámaca Velásquez v. Guatemala. Reparations and costs. Judgment of February 22, 2002. Series C No. 91, para. 43, and Case of González Medina and family, supra note 13, para. 276. 36