A/HRC/45/13/Add.3 requirements, comprising, notably, the requirements of effectiveness, independence, promptness and expedition, accessibility to the family and sufficient public scrutiny.” 144. The Inter-American Court stated in The Pueblo Bello Massacre v. Colombia (paragraph 145–146): “The execution of an effective investigation is a fundamental and conditioning element for the protection of certain rights that are affected or annulled by these situations, such as, in the instant case, the rights to personal liberty, humane treatment and life. This assessment is valid whatsoever the agent to which the violation may eventually be attributed, even individuals, because, if their acts are not investigated genuinely, they would be, to some extent, assisted by the public authorities, which would entail the State’s international responsibility. (…) The Court has maintained that by implementing or tolerating actions aimed at carrying out extrajudicial executions, failing to investigate them adequately and, when applicable, failing to punish those responsible effectively, the State violates its obligations to respect and ensure the rights established in the Convention to the alleged victims and their next of kin, prevents society from knowing what happened, and reproduces the conditions of impunity for this type of acts to be repeated.” 145. The Inter-American Court considered the obligation of the State to undertake effective investigations as part of the collective and individual right to know the truth to be applicable to cases of enforced disappearances not directly attributed to State agents. 284 When particular life-threatening circumstances or specific risks of disappearances by nonState actors can be identified, additional investigative steps are required to be undertaken by State authorities, including taking witness statements, the alerting of checkpoints, checking identification papers and official records of detainees in detention facilities.285 The absence of the involvement of State agents in the commission of enforced disappearances does not shield the State from incurring international responsibility if the State fails to take preventive measures. 286 Furthermore, States should investigate potential acts of involvement, collusion, or acquiescence of State authorities in criminal acts committed by non-State actors conducive to enforced disappearances.287 146. The Inter-American Court stated in the Gordínez Cruz case, (paragraph 188): “Where the acts of private parties that violate the Convention are not seriously investigated, those parties are aided in a sense by the government, thereby making the State responsible on the international plane.” 147. In Mexico, State agents and non-State actors allegedly committed enforced disappearances. The lack of effective investigative procedures make it impossible to identify if non-State actors participated in the commission of disappearances and if these have been tolerated by State actors. Therefore, new legislative and investigative mechanisms in Mexico focus on victims of disappearances, regardless if the authors of the offense were State actors or not.288 284 285 286 287 288 IACHR, The Pueblo Bello Massacre v. Colombia (see footnote 127) paras. 143, 161, 171, 193 and 212. See European Court of Human Rights, Koku v. Turkey, Application no. 27305/95, 31 May 2005; European Court of Human Rights, Medova v. Russia, Application No. 25385/04, European Court of Human Rights, 15 January 2009; IACHR, González et al. (‘Cotton Field’) v. Mexico (see footnote 132). IACHR, Godínez-Cruz v. Honduras (merits) judgment of 20, 1989, Series C No. 3, para. 188; IACHR, Velásquez Rodríguez Case (see footnote 123) para. 177; European Court of Human Rights, Mahmut Kaya v. Turkey (see footnote 187) para. 78. A/HRC/36/39/Add.2, para.h 88(c). See the contribution for this report by Mexico. Available at www.ohchr.org. 47