59 b) Regarding the other measures of satisfaction, the Peace Agreements are the principal guarantee of non-repetition of these facts, because they have allowed Guatemalan society to end the armed conflict. Considerations of the Court 175. The Court will examine other forms of reparation relating to the violation of Articles 1(1), 5, 7, 8 and 25 of the American Convention and non-compliance with the obligations established in Articles 1, 6 and 8 of the Inter-American Convention against Torture. Investigation and punishment of those responsible 176. The Court observes that, at the time of this judgment, more than eleven years after the facts of the instant case occurred, those responsible for the abduction, detention, torture, and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment committed against Maritza Urrutia have still not been identified, prosecuted and punished; therefore there is a situation of impunity (supra para. 129), which constitutes a violation of the State’s obligation that harms the victim, her next of kin, and the whole of society, and encourages chronic repetition of the human rights violations in question.120 177. The State must conduct an effective investigation of the facts of this case, identify those responsible for them, both the intellectual authors and the perpetrators, as well as possible accessories, and punish them administratively and criminally, as applicable.121 The respective domestic proceedings should relate to the violations of the right to humane treatment and to personal liberty, referred to in this judgment. The victim should have full access and capacity to act at all stages and in all instances of the investigation and the corresponding trial, in accordance with domestic law and the norms of the American Convention. The results of the trial must be published. * * * 178. In relation to the public apology requested by the representatives of the victim and, considering the allegations made by the State, the Court reiterates that this judgment constitutes, per se, a form of reparation and satisfaction for the victim. In the same way, the Court also observes that, on August 9, 2000, the President of the Republic of Guatemala made an “institutional acknowledgement” of the State’s responsibility with regard to several cases being processed before the Inter-American Commission, including the Maritza Urrutia case. XVIII COSTS AND EXPENSES Arguments of the representatives of the victim 120 Cf. Bulacio case, supra note 14, para. 120; Juan Humberto Sánchez case, supra note 14, para. 185; and Las Palmeras case. Reparations, supra note 15, para. 53 a). 121 Cf. Bulacio case, supra note 14, para. 121; Las Palmeras case. Reparations, supra note 15, para. 66; and El Caracazo case. Reparations, supra note 105, para. 118.