CCPR/C/127/D/2760/2016 12.8 The Committee also takes note of the authors’ claim that the facts constitute treatment contrary to articles 7, 9 and 16 of the Covenant, read alone and in conjunction with article 2 (3), in respect of Mr. Moreno Pérez. In this connection, the authors maintain that the authorities’ initial, deliberate failure to search for the missing person, and the subsequent obstruction of their search, make it reasonable to presume that Mr. Moreno Pérez was deprived of his liberty against his will; that, during his deprivation of liberty, he was left with a feeling of distress and defencelessness that caused him intense suffering; and that, in these circumstances, he was deprived of the protection of the law. However, in the absence of clear information as to the fate and whereabouts of Mr. Moreno Pérez, the Committee considers that, since it has not been possible to prove that the facts of the present case entail a deprivation of liberty prior to a deprivation of life, it does not have sufficient evidence to find a violation of articles 7 and 16 in respect of Mr. Moreno Pérez. 12.9 The Committee also notes that the authors allege a violation, in respect of themselves, of article 7 of the Covenant, read alone and in conjunction with article 2 (3), owing to the fact that the serious omissions and obstructions in the investigation of the disappearance and the premature closure of the case by the authorities overseeing it have caused them great suffering, which exacerbates the loss of their loved one, and that the continuing uncertainty caused by the disappearance causes them “anxiety and stress and is a blight on their life”. In the light of the foregoing, and taking account of the threats that Mr. Moreno Pérez’s father received after getting involved in the investigation of his son’s disappearance (see para. 2.21 above), the Committee concludes that the facts before it disclose a violation of article 7 of the Covenant, read alone and in conjunction with article 2 (3), in respect of the authors.60 13. The Committee, acting under article 5 (4) of the Optional Protocol, is of the view that the information before it discloses a violation by the State party of article 6 (1), read alone and in conjunction with article 2 (3) of the Covenant, in respect of Mr. Moreno Pérez, and a violation of article 7, read alone and in conjunction with article 2 (3), in respect of the authors of the communication. 14. Under article 2 (3) (a) of the Covenant, the State party is under an obligation to provide the authors with an effective remedy. This requires that full reparation be made to individuals whose rights have been violated. The State party should therefore: (a) conduct a prompt investigation that is effective and thorough, impartial and independent, and transparent into the circumstances of the disappearance of Mr. Moreno Pérez, with a view to establishing the truth; (b) provide the authors with detailed information on the outcome of the investigation; (c) prosecute and punish those responsible for Mr. Moreno Pérez’s disappearance and probable death, and make the results of such measures public; (d) investigate and, where appropriate, punish any action on the part of State agents that might have diminished the efficacy of the search and location operations; (e) assuming that Mr. Moreno Pérez is deceased, endeavour to find his mortal remains and return them to his family in dignified conditions; and (f) provide full reparation to the authors, including adequate compensation for the violations committed. The State party is also under an obligation to take steps to prevent the occurrence of similar violations in the future. 15. Bearing in mind that, by becoming a party to the Optional Protocol, the State party has recognized the competence of the Committee to determine whether or not there has been a violation of the Covenant and that, pursuant to article 2 of the Covenant, the State party has undertaken to ensure for all individuals within its territory or subject to its jurisdiction the rights recognized in the Covenant and to provide an effective and enforceable remedy when a violation has been established, the Committee wishes to receive from the State party, within 180 days, information on the measures taken to give effect to the present Views. The State party is also requested to publish the present Views and to have them widely disseminated. 60 GE.19-21673 Boudjema v. Algeria (CCPR/C/121/D/2283/2013), para. 8.8. 15