11 was not theirs and that when the judge decided the jurisdiction issue, the case would be sent to Mixco Prosecution Unit 32. He said that he was rebuked for having interacted with the victim’s mother when 33 she came to exchange information on the case. 55. The First Criminal Court of First Instance officially declined jurisdiction on September 2, 34 2002 and referred the case file to the Guatemala City Eighth Court of First Instance, which brought the 35 question of the competing jurisdictions to the Supreme Court on September 25, 2002. On November 21, 2002, the Supreme Court ruled that the First Criminal Court of First Instance was the forum with 36 jurisdiction over the case. 56. Various irregularities in the conduct of the investigation into this case were documented by the Office of the Human Rights Ombudsperson of Guatemala which, in exercise of its functions, launched an investigation into the case as a result of the complaint filed by Mrs. Rosa Elvira Franco concerning violation of due process by the Prosecutor’s Office. Specifically, Mrs. Franco argued that the 37 investigation process had not moved forward and was at a standstill: Having examined the complaint, the measures taken and the reports received, it was established that the Public Prosecutor’s Office did not adhere to the principle of objectivity in its exercise of its authority in respect of government investigation and prosecution of crime, within the time periods that the law prescribes. This points up the State’s inability to ensure to the inhabitants of Guatemala their rights to life, to personal liberty, to justice, to security, to peace and to fulfillment, as required under the Constitution, inasmuch as the general population lives without any security; no authority is capable of establishing the material and intellectual authorship of the criminal acts 38 that happen every day. 57. As for the incoming and outgoing calls on María Isabel Véliz Franco’s cell phone, the case file contains a request for a list of those calls. The request came from the Judicial Branch and was 39 sent to Telecomunicaciones de Guatemala on April 1, 2002. The telephone company produced that 40 information on May 9, 2002. On September 4, 2002, that information was forwarded to the investigator 41 on the case for analysis. The case file contains a number of requests resulting from the analysis of the 42 calls. The Criminal Investigations Technician sent the report to the Deputy Prosecutor on June 8, 2005. 33 Annex 19. Memorandum dated September 16, 2002, from Edgar Romero Arana, Deputy Prosecutor in Unit 5 of the Public Prosecutor’s Office, addressed to Rubén Eliu Higueros Girón, Deputy Executive Secretary of the Public Prosecutor’s Office. Document supplied by the petitioners on April 25, 2007. 34 Annex 20. Case No. 105-2002/Of. 6º. Issued by the First Criminal Court of First Instance, September 2, 2002. Document supplied by the State on June 25, 2007. 35 Annex 21. Memorandum C-3100-2002 Of 2º. Issued by the Eighth Criminal Court of First Instance, dated March 11, 2002. Attachment to the State’s communication of June 25, 2007. 36 Annex 22. Jurisdiction Question No. 93-2002, Ruling issued by the Supreme Court on November 21, 2002. Document supplied by the State on June 25, 2007. 37 38 Annex 23. Report of the Human Rights Ombudsperson, dated November 2, 2004. Ref. Exp. Ord. Gua. 41-2003/DI Annex 23. Report of the Human Rights Ombudsperson, dated November 2, 2004. Ref. Exp. Ord. Gua. 41-2003/DI. 39 Annex 24. Request from Judge Jose Arturo Rodas, dated April 1, 2002, asking Telecomunicaciones de Guatemala for a list of calls. Document supplied by the petitioners on April 25, 2007. 40 Annex 25. Letter from the Telgua Company to Unit No. 2 of the Metropolitan District Prosecutor’s Office concerning the April 1, 2002 request for a list of calls. Document supplied by the petitioners on April 25, 2007. 41 Annex 26. Memorandum dated September 4, 2002, from Santos Estuardo García to Lucas Gerardo Jiménez, Investigator. Document supplied by the petitioners on April 25, 2007. 42 Annex 27. Memorandum DICRI 1678-2005 dated June 8, 2005, from Jaime David Subuyuj Zuleta, Criminal Investigations Technician, to Rubén Gabriel Rivera Herrera, Deputy Prosecutor. Document supplied by the State on June 25, 2007..