-39Battalion, and who the alleged victims’ mother had indicated should be summoned to
provide information during the habeas corpus procedure, were never summoned to
testify. No reference was made to this evidence during the criminal proceedings.
48(51) On October 7, 1997, at the request of the prosecutor assigned by the Special
Crimes Unit, the Chalatenango Trial Court issued an official communication to the
Joint Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces, requesting information concerning the
identity “of the officer responsible for the military operation carried out in Los
Alvarenga canton[, and also] the list of the members of the Atlacatl Battalion who
took part in the operation [carried out] on June 22, [1982].” On November 4, 1997,
the Joint Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces advised that his “files did not contain the
name of the officer responsible for this military operation, or the list of personnel
who took part in it”; he also stated that, “on June 22, 1982, the ATLACATL Battalion
was involved in a military operation in Morazán Department.” The Joint Chief of Staff
did not submit any type of general information on this battalion, nor was this
requested by the court, despite the failure to provide the specific information
required.
48(52) On December 10, 1997, the prosecutor assigned by the Special Crimes Unit
stated that, since, in the proceedings, two dates appeared on which the
“disappearance of the children” could have occurred, “another official communication
should be sent to the Joint Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces[,] requesting him to
provide information on the identity of the commanding officer [… and] the list of the
members of the Atlacatl Battalion who took part in the military operation on June 2,
1982.” The following day, the court sent an official communication to the Joint Chief
of Staff of the Armed Forces and on January 28, 1998, he advised that, according to
his record of June 2, 1982, the ‘Atlacatl’ Battalion “was not operating in Los
Alvarenga canton, Nueva Trinidad jurisdiction.” The Joint Chief of Staff did not
provide any further general information on the said battalion, such as the names of
its members; and the court did not request this, despite the failure to provide the
specific information that had been requested. The Chalatenango Trial Court filed the
case on May 27, 1998 (supra para. 48(25)).
48(53) On March 30, 2001, the prosecutor assigned by the Special Crimes Unit
requested that a judicial inspection be carried out of the logbook of the Salvadoran
Air Force, and also of the records of the Armed Forces corresponding to the months
of June and July 1982, “in order to establish whether there had been a military
presence in [the] said month[s] and year and […] to trace the children,” Ernestina
and Erlinda Serrano Cruz.
48(54) On April 2, 2001, the Chalatenango Trial Court cautioned the prosecutor
assigned to the court that he should decide “where he want[ed] to establish the
military presence [during the months of June and July 1982]; and also explain what
he wished to prove with the requested inspection, in relation to the whereabouts of
the children.” On April 20, 2001, the prosecutor answered the said caution and
indicated that “the prosecutor’s office want[ed] to establish the military presence
where the children [Ernestina and Erlinda Serrano Cruz] were abducted in Santa
Anita canton, municipality of San Antonio de [L]a Cruz, Chalatenango[…,] allegedly
[by] members of the Atlacatl Battalion, [in the] military operation carried out on
June [2, 1982].” The prosecutor assigned to the case stated that “what he wished to
establish” with “the requested inspection of the records of the Armed Forces General
Staff [was] whether the Armed Forces had really been present at the site of the facts
[…,] and if so[,] to establish which military base was there, in order to interview