E/CN.4/2002/73/Add.1 page 20 from the destroyed building were mislaid, as were several important items seized in searches; other important items were not confiscated or were given back without having been analysed; audio and video cassettes were returned without having been copied or recorded; there was no attempt to reconstruct events; In terms of obstacles to the conduct of the investigation, the Migration Office failed to provide various important pieces of information, as requested. Moreover, the security forces were found responsible for the loss of significant pieces of evidence and for having violated the prohibition on communicating with various police officers who had been arrested; moreover, the security forces tipped off a suspect who was about to be arrested, enabling him to escape; It was also stated that elements of the case had been brought before the court conducting the oral proceedings. If, as indicated by non-governmental interlocutors, the investigation into other elements of the case is to continue, the decision compromises the conduct of the investigation. It amounts to closing the investigation into the individuals charged and the events in which they were involved, whereas, as matters stand, these individuals and the evidence relating to them are the only elements in the file; in other words, there is no other evidence and there are no other leads. The decision to refer the case to the trial court may thus result in the closure of the investigation into the bombing of AMIA. Moreover, the search for evidence relating to these individuals has not finished. Thus, important evidence, the gathering of which was ordered by the court of second instance, such as the reconstruction of events (and evidence emerging as a result), as well as other evidence that might have emerged as the file was brought to the knowledge of plaintiffs, has still not been produced; Lastly, according to non-governmental sources, there has been little progress in the AMIA case inasmuch as the results obtained six years into the investigation are more or less those obtained in the first week; those responsible for the attack have not been identified; Approaches to the case have differed between, on the one hand, Memoria Activa, an organization of families of victims seeking the truth and, on the other, the Delegación de Asociaciones Israelitas Argentinas (DAIA) representing the Jewish community, as well as families of victims. Memoria Activa members take the view that the failure of the investigation to produce results has demonstrated the ineffectiveness of the State and have decided to take the case to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. DAIA, on the other hand, takes the view that, notwithstanding instances of anti-Semitism in some institutions such as the police, army and judiciary, trust must be placed in the Argentine system of justice (Argentina was one of the first countries to have adopted anti-discrimination legislation, which has been made use of by the Jewish community in various cases and has led to many decisions in favour of Jewish plaintiffs), which must be allowed to follow its course.