CCPR/C/114/D/2134/2012 9.7 The Committee observes that in the present case the authors attribute the lack of any effective and rigorous investigation specifically to the absolute lack of any investigation of paramilitary groups operating in the area with the acquiescence of the armed forces. The Attorney General’s Office allegedly questioned only the authors and the notary in Puerto Triunfo, without at any time including or taking into considerati on the irregular armed groups present in the region, despite the fact that, according to extensive information provided by the authors, the events and the timing and mode of disappearance were consistent with the modus operandi of those groups. The Committee further observes that although the authors have submitted numerous reports and requests for information to the various police, criminal and administrative authorities with competence for the case since March 1995, they have so far received no official information about the fate or whereabouts of their disappeared family members. Moreover, the State party has not provided convincing arguments to justify its delay in completing the investigation and bringing those responsible to justice. In the light of the foregoing, the Committee considers that the State party has not provided an effective remedy to the authors in respect of the disappearance of their family members, as required under article 2, paragraph 3, of the Covenant. Consequently, the Committee concludes that the actions in question constitute a violation of article 2, paragraph 3, read in conjunction with articles 6, 7, 9 and 16. 9.8 The authors maintain that they themselves and their families have suffered deeply and experienced severe stress as a result of the disappearance of their loved ones and the uncertainty surrounding their fate and whereabouts, which would constitute prohibited treatment under article 7 of the Covenant. The Committee also observes that the State has reportedly not made the requisite effort to investigate the disappearance of Mr. Anzola and Mr. Molina, to prosecute those responsible and to provide redress to the authors and that the State party has not contested this assertion. Consequently, the Committee concludes that the events in question constitute a violation of article 7 of the Covenant and of article 2, paragraph 3, read in conjunction with article 7. 9.9 Having concluded that the above provisions have been violated, the Committee considers that it is not necessary to take a decision on the allegations relating to articles 10, 17 and 23, paragraph 1, of the Covenant. 10. The Committee, acting under article 5, paragraph 4, of the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, is of the v iew that the facts before it reveal a violation of articles 6, 7, 9 and 16 and of article 2, paragraph 3, read in conjunction with articles 6, 7, 9 and 16, of the Covenant, in respect of Mr. Anzola and Mr. Molina, and of article 7 and of article 2, paragra ph 3, read in conjunction with article 7, of the Covenant, in respect of the authors. 11. In accordance with article 2, paragraph 3 (a), of the Covenant, the State party is under an obligation to provide the authors with an effective remedy, including: (a) the performance of an independent, thorough and effective investigation of the disappearance of Mr. Anzola and Mr. Molina and prosecution and punishment of those responsible; (b) the release of Mr. Anzola and Mr. Molina should they still be alive; (c) if they are dead, the hand-over of their remains to their family; and (d) effective reparation, including adequate compensation, medical and psychological rehabilitation and appropriate measures of satisfaction for the authors for the violations suffered. The State party is also under an obligation to prevent similar violations from occurring in the future and to ensure that any forced disappearances give rise to a prompt, impartial and effective investigation. 12. 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 there has been a violation of the Covenant or not and that, pursuant to article 2 of the Covenant, GE.15-15601 15/20