- 13- 169. The Court considers that, while what happened to the Serrano Cruz sisters and their whereabouts have not been determined, they cannot be aware of their real given name and surnames and, consequently, their family relations. This places the State in a position where it has the obligation to carry out a search encompassing all the different situations in which the Serrano Cruz sisters may be. 170. Furthermore, the right to a name includes the right of the next of kin to recognition of the relationship linking them to Ernestina and Erlinda Serrano Cruz, and this persists even after death. For the family, the given name and surnames that the parents gave them when they were born signify recognition of their family relations. By violating Ernestina and Erlinda's right to a name and questioning their very existence, the State denies their relationship to their next of kin. 171. The Court also observes that, in defending itself in the proceedings before the Inter-American Court, the State has alleged the possible inexistence of the sisters, Ernestina and Erlinda Serrano Cruz, “combined with the financial interest” of their mother. At the same time, during the criminal proceedings before the Chalatenango Trial Court, it appears that the prosecutor’s requests and the judge’s actions were addressed at investigating the identity and existence of Ernestina and Erlinda Serrano Cruz (supra para. 48(68) to 48(77)). To this end, the judge, at the request of the prosecutor, ordered several expert appraisals to be carried out to verify the authenticity of the baptismal records of Ernestina and Erlinda Serrano Cruz kept by the Catholic Church, even though, in addition to these records, their births were registered in the Registry Office. While the Special Transitory Law to establish the civil status of undocumented persons affected by the conflict was in force, Mrs. Cruz Franco registered her daughters, Ernestina and Erlinda Serrano Cruz, in the respective mayors' offices (supra para. 48(10)), under the first names that she and her husband had chosen when her daughters were born and the last names of their parents. 172. In its preamble, this law recognizes that “the violence experienced by El Salvador for more than ten years gave rise to the emigration of Salvadorans to other countries, which prevented the establishment of their usual necessary and correct filiation and registration in the registry offices.” Consequently, Article 4 of this law established that “[t]he registry office registrations and the certifications issued under [the said] law [by] the respective heads of the registry office or [by] the municipal mayors, w[ould] have the effects established in the Civil Code and other laws.” Therefore, the State has not accorded the appropriate legal effects to the civil registrations of Ernestina and Erlinda. 173. The Court has noted that, by changing the course of the investigation in the criminal case before the Chalatenango Trial Court (supra para. 48(68) to 48(77)), the prosecutor and the judge of the criminal case being heard in this court only summoned to testify those persons who had stated they did not know of the existence of the sisters, Ernestina and Erlinda Serrano Cruz. However, they failed to summon those persons who had stated before the Ombudsman's office that they knew these sisters. In this regard, that Office mentioned the testimony of four persons who stated they knew Ernestina and Erlinda Serrano Cruz, including that of Felicita Franco, given on February 17, 2004, stating that she attended Mrs. Cruz Franco during Ernestina's birth. The representatives also presented the sworn written statement made by Felicita Franco before notary public on December 11, 2003, as an attachment to their written arguments on preliminary objections (supra para. 6). In