48 para. 46) includes several “lists of victims presented to the Truth Commission,” one of which includes the names of “Fermina Gregoria Contreras Recinos” (sic) and “Julia Ynos Contreras” (sic), both as victims of murder on August 25, 1982, and “Serapio Cristian Contreras” as a victim of disappearance on August 25, 1982, facts attributed to the Armed Forces.200 133. However, as part of its mandate, the Truth Commission issued a series of recommendations, including a section on “measures for national reconciliation.” Among other matters, this section indicates: All in all, to reach the goal of pardon, it is necessary to pause and consider certain consequences that can be inferred from knowing the truth about the grave incidents described in this Report. One of them, perhaps the most difficult to face in the current context of the country, is that of satisfying the requirements of justice. These requirements point in two directions. One is to punish those responsible. The other is the reparation due to the victims and their next of kin.201 134. In addition, from the evidence presented in this case, it emerges that on May 31, 1996, the representatives of the Search Association filed a complaint with the Ombudsman’s Office in which it set out a total of 145 cases of children who had been victims of forced disappearance, all in the context of the Salvadoran armed conflict. The Ombudsman’s Office issued a decision on March 30, 1998, under case file SS-0449-96 referring, among other cases, to the forced disappearance of Gregoria Herminia, Serapio Cristian and Julia Inés Contreras, and José Rubén Rivera, in which members of the Armed Forces of El Salvador are indicated at those responsible for the said disappearances.202 It also ordered that the decision be notified, among others, to the Prosecutor General so that he could initiate “the legally established procedures in order to determine the corresponding criminal responsibilities,”203 and this was done on November 6, 1998.204 135. In this regard, the Court considers it pertinent to reiterate, as it has in other cases, that, in compliance with their obligation to guarantee the right to know the truth, States may establish truth commissions that contribute to the construction and preservation of the historical memory, the clarification of the facts, and the determination of institutional, social, and political responsibilities during specific historical periods of a society.205 Nevertheless, this does not fulfill or substitute for the State’s obligation to establish the truth through judicial proceedings206; thus the State had an obligation to launch a criminal investigation to determine the corresponding criminal responsibilities. Also, although a complaint before the Ombudsman’s Office can result in effective and useful actions in cases of alleged human rights violations, it is clear that the facts denounced were also brought to the attention of the Office of the Prosecutor General whose responsibility it was to initiate the corresponding 200 Cf. Appendices to the Report of the Truth Commission for El Salvador, From madness to hope: the 12-year war in El Salvador, 1992-1993, Volume II (evidence file, volume XIII, attachments to the Commission's final observations, folio 8308). 201 Report of the Truth Commission for El Salvador, supra note 28, (evidence file, volume III, attachment 3 to the application, folio 2088). 202 Cf. Decision issued by the Ombudsman’s Office, supra note 70 (evidence file, volume III, attachment 15 to the application, folios 2196 to 2233). 203 Decision issued by the Ombudsman’s Office, supra note 70 (evidence file, volume III, attachment 15 to the application, folio 2233). 204 Cf. Official communication No. DR5-476/98 addressed to the Prosecutor General on November 6, 1998 (evidence file, volume III, attachment 18 to the application, folio 2239). 205 Cf. Case of Zambrano Vélez et al., supra note 55, para. 128; Case of Gomes Lund et al. (Guerrilha do Araguaia), supra note 97, para. 297, and Case of Radilla Pacheco, supra note 25, para. 74. 206 Cf. Case of Zambrano Vélez et al., supra note 55, para. 128; Case of Gomes Lund et al. (Guerrilha do Araguaia), supra note 97, para. 297, and Case of Ibsen Cárdenas and Ibsen Peña, supra note 100, para. 158.