10 38. That, given the above, the Tribunal finds that the State has fully complied with this obligation. * * * 39. That, as regards the creation of a prompt procedure to obtain a declaration of absence and presumption of death due to forced disappearance (seventh operative paragraph of the Judgment on reparations), the State noted that it has prepared a bill for the amendment of Sections 42 and 64 of the Guatemalan Civil Code, governing absence and presumed death, “that was submitted to the Programa Nacional de Resarcimiento [National Redress Program], [the] Procuraduría General de la Nación [Public Prosecutor’s Office] and the Supreme Court of Justice for them to issue a legal opinion thereon.” Moreover, it noted that, on March 10, 2009, “the Registro Nacional de Personas [National Civil Registry] filed with the Congress of the Republic of Guatemala a [b]ill to enact [the] ‘Ley Temporal Especial para la Reposición de Inscripciones Registrales’ [Special Temporary Law for the Replacement of Registry Records],” intended to “authorize Civil Registrars in each municipality in Guatemala in order that, acting under their strict responsibility and at the request of the interested parties, they may replace any registry records of the marital status and capacity of individuals that have been misplaced, deteriorated or altered.” 40. That, at the public hearing (supra Having Seen clause No. 5), the representatives noted that: Throughout the written proceedings, the State has reported on various measures or legislative bills. At first, as was the case with the search for the remains, this was made subject to the creation of a Comisión Nacional de Búsqueda [National Search Commission] […]. It now mentions a bill that has not even been submitted to Congress, and another bill that was submitted earlier this year but bears no connection with the measure of reparation granted by the Court but, rather, relates to the substitution of records that have been destroyed due to different reasons and that are entirely unrelated to the creation of a prompt procedure. Moreover, we are not aware either of the full text of this bill that was allegedly submitted. In this regard, all we can do is express our deep concern over the State’s failure to comply, not only with the Judgment, but also with its obligation to timely and fully report on each of the orders. 41. That the Commission made no statements in this regard. 42. That the Court notes that the bill for the amendment of Sections 42 and 64 of the Civil Code has not yet been submitted to the Legislative Branch for debate and subsequent enactment purposes. As to the bill for the “Ley Temporal Especial para la Reposición de Inscripciones Registrales,” the State has failed to explain how it relates to the measure of reparation ordered by the Court. 43. That, again, as far as this aspect of the Judgment is concerned, it becomes necessary for the State to secure effective coordination between the various State institutions. 44. That, considering the above, this Court finds it essential for the State to submit another schedule detailing the steps to be taken, the dates of such steps and the parties responsible therefor, so that a prompt procedure may soon be created to obtain a declaration of absence and presumed death due to forced disappearance. For such purpose, the State shall appoint a representative of the Legislative Branch who, working together with COPREDEH, shall prepare the aforementioned report. 45. That, in the Order issued by the President on August 17, 2009 (supra Having Seen clause No. ¡Error! No se encuentra el origen de la referencia.), it was confirmed that “according to the information submitted by the State, compliance with this aspect of the Judgment is currently dependent upon the cooperation of the Comisión Nacional de Búsqueda and the enactment of the [Ley de la Comisión de Búsqueda de Personas Víctimas de la Desaparición Forzada y Otras Formas de Desaparición [Law on