17 disappearance of José Adrián Rochac Hernández, and also indicating the names of persons who can provide information on the matter. In effect, the Asociación Pro-Búsqueda suggested that a statement be taken from María Juliana Rochac Hernández, José Adrián’s sister and an eyewitness of the facts. It also suggested that a statement be taken from Dolores López Beltrán, a witness of the moment when the 58 soldiers took the child. 91. On August 28, 2003, an investigator together with the prosecutor assigned to the case went to the place where the facts occurred, but did not obtain any information. According to the State, this happened because of the time that has elapsed and since most of the residents at the time of the events 59 have died, while others have left the area. 92. In their petition of September 11, 2003, the petitioners indicated that they do not have any information on steps taken in the context of this investigation, even though they requested it on three 60 occasions. c. Habeas corpus proceeding 93. On October 16, 2002, Mr. Alfonso Hernández Herrera filed a writ of habeas corpus before the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice for the disappearance of his son José 61 Adrián Rochac Hernández. The brief filed sets forth the facts surrounding his disappearance; the child’s birth certificate was attached; and the witness statements of María Juliana Rochac Hernández and 62 Dolores López Beltrán were offered. 94. After filing the writ an executing judge was appointed to expedite the matter. According to procedural regulations set out in the Constitution, the powers of this “executing judge” consist of carrying out the order to show the person (auto de exhibición personal). To that end he has broad powers to seek 63 information from both state authorities and private persons. 95. The executing judge indicated that “the books and records kept by the respondent institutions do not include any related annotations or information on the date expressed by the petitioner; in addition, it was found that the minor is not deprived of his liberty in any of the grounds of the military 64 units of the Ministry of Defense and the Chief of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the Armed Forces.” 96. In a resolution of March 3, 2003, notice of which was made on March 11, 2003, the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice dismissed the habeas corpus proceeding. The resolution indicates that no minimum indicium was produced to generate the conviction that the 58 Letter from the Asociación Pro Búsqueda to the Unit on Women and Children, Office of the Attorney General, SubRegional Office in Soyapango. April 16, 2002. 59 Response from the State received March 10, 2004. 60 Annex xx. Letters of September 25, 2002, June 19, 2003, and August 25, 2003, requesting information on steps taken in the investigation into the disappearance of José Adrián Rochac Hernández. 61 Annex xx. Decision of the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice, March 3, 2003. 62 Annex xx. Motion filing writ of habeas corpus, October 16, 2002. 63 I/A Court H.R., Case of the Serrano Cruz Sisters v. El Salvador. Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of March 1, 2005. Series C No. 120, para. 80. This paragraph makes reference to Articles 44 and 45 of Legislative Decree 2996 of 1960, on Constitutional Procedures of El Salvador. 64 2003. Annex xx. Judgment of Habeas Corpus, Constitutional Chamber, Supreme Court of Justice of El Salvador, March 3,