44 190. According to information that the State provided in its communication of September 11, 2013, on March 4, 2009, entries, inspections and searches were conducted in the village of Chichupac. It maintained that the forensic anthropology procedures completed the identification of the skeletal remains of the child Antonio Chen Mendoza. It added that on June 23, 2013, an ossuary was handed over to Mr. Miguel Chen containing his son’s skeletal remains. 191. The Commission has no information of any further progress made in this process. f. Concerning the situation of Juana García Depaz 192. On June 9, 1995, Mrs. Juana García Depaz filed a complaint with the Public Prosecution Service concerning her arrest by members of the National Army in October 1983 and her subsequent three-month stay in the village of Pacux.289 On July 26, 2001, she gave another statement to the Public Prosecution Service in which she made reference to what was done to her.290 193. On November 2, 2009, Juana Garcia Depaz gave a sworn statement in which she made reference to the events that were detrimental to her person.291 194. The Commission has no information of any further progress made in this process. B. THE LAW 1. Preliminary matters 1.1. Concerning the victims’ identification 195. Within the Inter-American Commission’s petition and case system, all alleged victims in a given case are to be identified to the extent possible. Even so, there are situations in which identification poses challenges. In such situations, various factors have to be considered when analyzing the alleged victims’ identification, and certain standards of reasonability and flexibility may be called for. 196. The petitioners pointed out that the names of the alleged victims and their family members as reported in the various documents or accounts at times vary; in some instances, the accounts also differ as to the date and place of death. The petitioners reported that they were working with family members to correct the names shown on the birth and death certificates and pointed out that the differences were attributable to the following: i) the trauma and psychological impact that the genocide and grave human rights violations committed against them had on the survivors and their family members; ii) the extreme poverty of the victims and their family members and the fact that they had had little in the way of schooling; iii) the fact that the events occurred amid a war; iv) the enormous 289 Annex 10. Statement by Juana García Depaz, dated June 9, 1995. Case File No. 802-95. Annex 7 of the petitioners’ communication of December 13, 2007. 290 Annex 9. Statement by Juana García Depaz, dated July 26, 2001. Judicial case No. 255-93, pp. 14-15. Annex 2 of the petitioners’ communication of December 13, 2007. 291 Annex 13. Sworn statement of Juana Garcia Depaz, dated November 2, 2009. Attached to the petitioners’ communication of November 3, 2009.