49 criminal proceedings. However, it was only on March 16, 2000, that, in compliance with the decision of the Ombudsman’s Office, orders were given to open a case file to conduct a criminal investigation into the facts.207 Consequently, the Court finds that, since the State did not initiate a criminal investigation into what happened to Gregoria Herminia, Julia Inés and Serapio Cristian Contreras, even though on three different occasions it had full knowledge that they had been disappeared during the Salvadoran armed conflict, the State failed to comply in its duty to investigate those forced disappearances ex officio. C. Lack of due diligence in the criminal investigations 136. The State acknowledged its responsibility for violating Articles 8208 and 25209 of the American Convention, mentioning the legal grounds presented by the Commission in its application brief. The Court has verified that, in its application brief, the Commission referred to the investigations conducted up until January 2004, while the representatives presented information on the investigations carried out up until September 2010, and identified some specific obstacles that would allow and promote a situation of absolute impunity for the human rights violations committed during the Salvadoran armed conflict. They also affirmed that the cases of forced disappearance of children would “not be excluded from this reality.” In addition, the State forwarded a copy of the case file of the investigations carried out to December 2010 and January 2011. Thus the Court finds it necessary, based on all the evidence submitted, to establish clearly the facts that gave rise to the violations acknowledged by the State, and the omissions and failures of the authorities in charge of the investigations undertaken. 137. With regard to the processing of the investigations conducted in this case, it is pertinent to clarify that the criminal proceedings for the forced disappearances of José Rubén Rivera before the Second Trial Court of San Vicente (Case File 479-3-96) and of Ana Julia and Carmelina Mejía Ramírez before the Second Court of First Instance of San Francisco Gotera (Case 187/97), which have remained in the pre-trial investigation stage, were processed under the 1973 Code of Criminal Procedure, in force until 1998.210 Meanwhile, the investigations into the forced disappearances of José Rubén Rivera, Herminia, Serapio Cristian and Julia Inés Contreras (Case File 225-UDVSV-00), Gregoria Herminia, Serapio Cristian and Julia Inés Contreras (Case File 585-UDVSV-08), and Ana Julia and Carmelina Mejía Ramírez (Case File 238-UDV-OFM-2-10) were processed directly before the Public Prosecution Service under the 1998 Code of Criminal Procedure. 1. Initial criminal investigations 138. On November 15, 1996, Margarita Dolores Rivera de Rivera filed a criminal complaint before the Second Criminal Court of San Vicente owing to the forced disappearance of her 207 Cf. Official decision issued by Unit for Crimes against Life of San Vicente on March 16, 2000 (evidence file, volume X, attachment 5 to the answer to the application, folio 7242). 208 The pertinent part of Article 8 establishes that: “1. Every person has the right to a hearing, with due guarantees and within a reasonable time, by a competent, independent, and impartial tribunal, previously established by law, in the substantiation of any accusation of a criminal nature made against him or for the determination of his rights and obligations of a civil, labor, fiscal, or any other nature.” 209 Article 25(1) establishes that: “[e]veryone has the right to simple and prompt recourse, or any other effective recourse, to a competent court or tribunal for protection against acts that violate his fundamental rights recognized by the constitution or laws of the state concerned or by this Convention, even though such violation may have been committed by persons acting in the course of their official duties.” 210 Expert opinion provided by Ricardo Alberto Iglesias Herrera before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights during the public hearing held on May 17, 2011.