CED/C/10/D/1/2013 investigation of the alleged enforced disappearance of Mr. Yrusta for more than seven days. In the meantime, the authors were denied standing as private criminal plaintiffs, which prevented them from taking part in the judicial and investigative proceedings relating to their brother’s case and from giving effect to the available domestic remedies, including by ensuring that his alleged enforced disappearance was properly investigated. Lastly, the Committee noted that the State party failed to provide any information on the remedies available to the authors in relation to the investigation of the enforced disappearance of Mr. Yrusta or to indicate whether his case had been closed pursuant to Santa Fe Provincial Act No. 13.004. 8.8 The Committee therefore considered that the domestic remedies in respect of the authors’ request to be granted standing as parties to the prosecution had been unreasonably prolonged and that no other remedies had been available to them. 8.9 As no other obstacles to the admissibility of the communication existed, the Committee considered those portions of the communication to be admissible that raise issues under articles 1, 2, 12 (1) and (2), 17, 18, 20 and 24 of the Convention in relation to: the alleged enforced disappearance of Roberto Agustín Yrusta for a period of over seven days following his transfer from Córdoba to Santa Fe; the failure to provide information to his family regarding that transfer; the impossibility of communicating with Mr. Yrusta for a period of over seven days; the impossibility of gaining access to a court that would reach a decision without delay as to the lawfulness of Mr. Yrusta’s situation following his transfer from one prison to another; the inability of the authors to take an active part in the investigation of their brother’s case, including his enforced disappearance, because they have been refused legal standing as private criminal plaintiffs; and the lack of any investigation into that enforced disappearance. The Committee then proceeded to invite the State party to submit its observations on the merit of the authors’ claims. 8.10 The Committee notes that it has received no such information despite the fact that it has granted the State party five extensions for that purpose. 7 C. Additional comments by the authors 9.1 On 20 July 2015, the authors submitted additional comments. They state that nothing has changed since the Committee decided on the communication’s admissibility and they continue to be unable to have an investigation opened into the enforced disappearance of Mr. Yrusta. They also report that, on the strength of the Committee’s finding of admissibility, they petitioned the provincial court to decline jurisdiction so that the events in question could be investigated by a federal court. Their petition for a refusal of jurisdiction was denied by the provincial court judge, however, and their appeal against that decision has been pending for three months. The authors claim that no progress has been made in the investigation into the events that prompted them to submit the communication. 7 GE.16-05682 On 16 February 2015, the State party was invited to submit its observations on the merit of the communication by 16 June 2015 at the latest. On 17 June, 14 September, 21 September, 24 November and 18 December 2015, the State party requested extensions of the deadline for submission of its observations. The Committee granted the requested extensions. On 1 December 2015, a further extension was granted, at which time the State party was invited to submit its observations before 18 December 2015. At that time, the Committee indicated that if it did not receive such information, it would proceed to consider the communication on the basis of the documentation that it already possessed. On 18 December, the State party requested another extension. On 28 December, the State party was informed that, as indicated in the Committee’s note of 1 December 2015, the communication would be included in the programme of the next session of the Committee for its consideration. 13