6 resolved the situation. They maintained that the only procedure that was swiftly completed was the declaration of child abandonment and the subsequent adoptions of the children. 28. They alleged that the Ramírez brothers’ personal well-being was affected, above all their psychological well-being, for having been arbitrarily forced by the State to be separated from their biological mother and the biological father of Osmín Ricardo Tobar Ramírez, for having been arbitrarily housed in a private institution for 17 months, and having had to live with families residing in the United States of America where the language and cultural values were different from those of their biological parents, leading to anguish, pain and suffering. They noted that said suffering has continued throughout time due to the lack of contact with their biological parents. They also argued that the well-being of Mrs. Flor de María Ramírez Escobar and Mr. Gustavo Amílcar Tobar Fajardo was affected inasmuch as they were arbitrarily deprived of their children and were unable to contact them despite the different petitions and appeals presented to the Guatemalan authorities, which has caused them intense anguish, pain and suffering. 29. The petitioners asserted that the family life of the alleged victims has been impaired by the State due to its arbitrary intervention in the family unit, its failure to ensure communication and contact amongst the alleged victims, its failure to stop the attorneys and notaries involved in going forward with the adoption procedure, which was inconsistent with international standards in the matter, and its failure to comply with the Inter-American Convention on Letters Rogatory and Its Additional Protocol. 30. They alleged that the State has not investigated and, where appropriate, prosecuted and punished the authorities responsible for the unjustified delay in the proceedings to review the declaration of child abandonment, as well as other authorities and individuals that intervened in the declaration of abandonment and the adoption of Osmín Ricardo Tobar Ramírez and Jeffrey Rainiery Arias Ramírez. B. The State’s position 31. The State alleged that the authority that issued the declaration of child abandonment considered different evidence gathered in order to rule on the appropriateness of the protection measures in favor of the Ramírez brothers. The State indicated that in its decision of August 6, 1997, which decreed the children’s abandonment and granted custody to the home “Asociación de Niños de Guatemala”, the Court considered the report of the Section for Minors of the Office of the Prosecutor General of the Nation, the report of the social worker, and the statements of the mother and grandmother of Osmín Ricardo Tobar Ramírez and Jeffrey Rainiery Arias Ramírez, as well as the godmother of one of them, in order to corroborate the facts of the complaint received and to determine the conduct of the mother, Ms. Flor de María Ramírez Escobar. Therefore, it considered that it had complied with the necessary formalities to issue said declaration of child abandonment. 32. The State affirmed that Mrs. Flor de María Ramírez Escobar filed an appeal for review that was dismissed by the First Juvenile Court of the Department of Guatemala on September 23, 1997. 33. The State noted that Mrs. Flor de María Ramírez Escobar and Mr. Gustavo Amílcar Tobar Fajardo presented another appeal for review that was granted on November 7, 2000, and that once the review of the declaration of child abandonment was reconsidered, the supplemental statements of Mrs. Flor de María Ramírez Escobar and Mr. Gustavo Amílcar Tobar Fajardo were accepted on November 28, 2000 and December 6, 2000, respectively. The State indicated that it also ordered the social worker and psychologist of the Court that heard the case to conduct a social and psychological development study to determine whether Mrs. Flor de María Ramírez Escobar and Mr. Gustavo Amílcar Tobar Fajardo would provide an appropriate psychological, emotional and family setting for the aforementioned minor children. The study concluded that indeed they would. 34. The State indicated that on August 31, 2001, subsequent to the hearing, the Court ordered the forwarding of letters rogatory addressed to the Embassy of the United States of America so that through the Embassy, and through legal and administrative channels, it summoned both families residing in the United States

Select target paragraph3