residents of the Autonomous City of Buenos Aires, with the intervention of the Deputy Ombudsman for Children and the Poor of Victoria, who formally recorded the surrender. The record of the surrender prepared by the said official states that the mother “expressly affirms her willingness to surrender her daughter under provisional guardianship for the purpose of future adoption” to the said couple, and “expresse[d her] wish not to be summoned to any judicial procedure on guardianship and/or full adoption that may be conducted for that purpose.”17 Subsequently, Ms. Enríquez returned to Rosario del Tala, and there Mr. Fornerón, who had learned of the birth of the child through the said mutual friend, again consulted the mother about whether he was the father of the child and told her that, if this was so, they could both go and fetch her and he would take care of her. Ms. Enríquez confirmed that he was the father, but indicated that she did not want him to go and fetch the child.18 23. Owing to the foregoing, on July 3, 2000, 17 days after the birth of M, Mr. Fornerón and Ms. Enríquez appeared before the Ombudsman for Children and the Poor of Rosario del Tala. There Mr. Fornerón expressed his interest in acknowledging the paternity of M and indicated that, even though he was not certain he was the father, if appropriate, he wished to take responsibility for the child. Before the Ombudsman for Children and the Poor, Ms. Enríquez stated that Mr. Fornerón was not the father of the child and advised that the child was in Baradero, in an aunt’s house. On July 4, 2000, Mr. Fornerón informed the Children’s Ombudsman that he was concerned about the whereabouts of the child, as well as about her health, and expressed his doubts with regard to the version given by Ms. Enríquez. The following day, Ms. Enríquez appeared again before the same Ombudsman and told him that she had surrendered the child in guardianship for future adoption to a couple she knew, owing to her limited resources and, once again, assured that Mr. Fornerón was not the child’s father.19 24. On July 18, 2000, one month and two days after the birth of M and 15 days after having appeared before the Children’s Ombudsman, Mr. Fornerón went to the Civil Registry and legally acknowledged his daughter.20 25. The said facts were analyzed, inter alia, during several judicial proceedings to which the Court will refer below, corresponding to: (a) the criminal case on the possible elimination of civil status; (b) the civil case on judicial guardianship; (c) the civil case on visiting rights, and (d) the civil case on full adoption.21 Case entitled “Prosecutor requests precautionary measures – possible perpetration of elimination of civil status,” file No. 537 17 Cf. Record of the surrender of M dated June 17, 2000 (file of attachments to the answer, tome III, folio 3075). 18 Cf. Statement by Mr. Fornerón during the public hearing of October 11, 2011, and testimony of Olga Acevedo, supra note 16, folios 1141 and 1142. 19 Cf. Briefs of the Ombudsman for Children and the Poor of the jurisdiction of Rosario del Tala of July 3 and 5, 2000 (file of attachments to the answer, tome II, folios 2685 to 2687), and brief of the prosecution requesting precautionary measures of July 11, 2000 (file of attachments to the Merits Report, attachment 4, folios 38 al 40). 20 Cf. Birth certificate of M, supra note 16, folio 47. 21 In addition to the judicial proceedings examined in this judgment, the Commission and the representatives included references to two domestic proceedings regarding which they did not allege specific violations of the rights contained in the Convention; consequently, they will not be included in this chapter. These are the cases entitled “Fornerón Aníbal Leonardo, regarding precautionary measures,” file No. 33.707 before National Civil Justice Court No. 86 of the City of Buenos Aires and “Enríquez, Diana Elizabeth ref. her complaint,” before the Trial Court of Victoria. 9