-47punish those responsible within a reasonable time. “In the case of the Serrano sisters, the investigation was characterized by being incomplete, partial and slow”; b) María Victoria Cruz Franco filed the complaint before the domestic judicial system by submitting a report on the disappearance of her daughters; subsequently, she filed a petition for habeas corpus in their favor. However, “the whereabouts of the [Serrano Cruz sisters] have not been discovered and those responsible for their disappearance have not been identified or punished. More than eight years have elapsed since the case was reported to the competent authorities and, to date, the legal proceedings have come no closer to clarifying the facts, punishing those responsible and […] making reparation to the victims and their next of kin”; c) When deciding the petition for habeas corpus filed by María Victoria Cruz Franco, the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice stated that, under Salvadoran legislation, this remedy was “not appropriate to investigate the whereabouts of the Serrano Cruz sisters, and was contrary to the criteria of the court.” The Constitutional Chamber’s response, added to the fact that the criminal investigation against members of the Atlacatl Battalion is still at the pre-trial investigation stage, “results in the denial of justice”; d) In the criminal proceedings, various measures seeking to clarify whether the children were abducted from the zone by the Army have not been taken, despite the existence of several relevant probative elements. The Army has not provided any information that could help clarify the case, “such as a record with information on the children who were allegedly evacuated from the conflict zones during “Operación Limpieza” or the ‘Guinda de Mayo’”; e) The Salvadoran authorities have not taken any steps to trace the children. “During the proceedings, they have not taken a statement from any member of the Army, and they have not obtained documents that could provide relevant information.” “All the measures to trace documentation that could contribute relevant information to the case have been denied by the different military authorities in the various inquiries undertaken by the Chalatenango Trial Court.” No investigation has been made into whether the girls were transferred to a children’s home or given up in adoption. María de Gropp stated in her testimony before the Court that “no State authority had asked her for information about the fate of the children from the war”; f) “In recent months, the investigation has been aimed at proving that the children do not exist. The measures taken by the assigned prosecutor and the trial judge raise serious doubts about the impartiality of the investigation, and the authenticity of the evidence collected.” First, there are indications that María Esperanza Franco was coerced into making her final statement. Second, “the partiality of the proceedings is demonstrated, because the end purpose of the investigation has become to defend the State before the Court and not to identify and punish those responsible. Both the trial judge and the prosecutor in the case have affirmed this.” Even though an expert from the National Civil Police verified that, throughout the baptismal records where Erlinda is registered, there are changes in the ink and in the handwriting and “crossings out,” the prosecutor asked for the records to be re-examined and,