12 State’s security forces, namely the Army, the civil self-defense patrols, the military commissioners, the Treasury Police, the military foot-police, the national police, the judicial police and the “death squadrons.”39 56. On the occasion of its on-site visit to Guatemala in May 1985, the IACHR also documented the following: […] in addition to direct testimony taken from relatives of hundreds of disappeared persons, the Commission also heard from eye witnesses to some of the abductions and captures; it met with members of the Mutual Support Group (GAM) and received additional new complaints. It also learned of abductions and disappearances that took place precisely during the Commission’s onsite visit in Guatemala; it directly investigated the agencies accused of participating in these events and spoke with all manner of officials and any public and private persons who might be able to provide valuable information about these problems. It also took personal measures of all kinds to establish the whereabouts of anyone who might still be alive; to eradicate this abhorrent practice, to have the authors of these crimes investigated and to get the country’s highest40 ranking authorities to devote special attention to the grave situation of the disappeared. 57. The Commission underscored the point that because of the State’s strategy, it was virtually impossible to learn any news of the whereabouts of a disappeared person, despite the tireless searches made by family members and friends, at morgues, at hospitals, at military posts and at police stations. Here the CEH maintained that “one of the many effects of the government’s decision to use forced disappearance as a repressive measure was the definitive failure of any petitions of habeas corpus.”41 1.2.5. Violence against children 58. following: As for the situation of children amid the armed conflict in Guatemala, the CEH wrote the […] The CEH has confirmed with particular concern that a large number of children were also among the direct victims of arbitrary execution, forced disappearance, torture, rape and other violations of their fundamental rights. Moreover, the armed confrontation left a large number of children orphaned and abandoned, especially among the Mayan population, who saw their families destroyed and the possibility of living a normal childhood within the norms of their 42 culture, lost. 39 I/A Court H.R., Case of Molina Theissen v. Guatemala. Judgment of May 4, 2004. Merits. Series C No. 106, par. 40. See also, I/A Court H.R., Case of Tiu Tojín v. Guatemala. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of November 26, 2008. Series C No. 190, par. 49; I/A Court H.R., Case of the Plan de Sánchez Massacre v. Guatemala. Merits. Judgment of April 29, 2004. Series C No. 105; I/A Court H.R., Case of the Plan de Sánchez Massacre v. Guatemala. Reparations and Costs. Judgment of November 19, 2004. Series C No. 116. 40 IACHR, Third Report on the Situation of Human Rights in the Republic of Guatemala, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.66, approved on October 3, 1985, Chapter II, paragraph 7, in Spanish only. 41 Annex 3. CEH, Memory of Silence, Volume III, Human Rights Violations and Acts of Violence, paragraph 2819. 42 Annex 1. CEH, Memory of Silence, Volume V, Conclusions and Recommendations, par. 28.