has not been made of human remains that were probably mistaken for those of Justice [Serrano Abadía]” 495. 317. First, the Court considers it reprehensible that the body delivered to the next of kin of Justice Serrano Abadía has not yet been exhumed. This is particularly relevant when the State’s main argument regarding Norma Constanza Esguerra Forero is that her body was returned erroneously to the family of this justice. Nevertheless, this lack of due diligence of the State is not sufficient to disprove the specific indications according to which the said corpse could belong to Ms. Esguerra Forero. Thus, the Court underscores that: (i) it is highly probable that the said body was returned erroneously to the next of kin of the justice, because both the autopsy report (verifying the presence of a uterus) and the record of the removal of the body indicated that it was the body of a woman, and (ii) during the removal of this corpse, objects were found that Ms. Esguerra Forero’s mother identified as belonging to her daughter. Consequently, the Court considers that, despite the general indications that would point towards a possible forced disappearance of Ms. Esguerra Forero, according to the information available at this time, there are direct and specific indications relating to this victim that would not lead to that conclusion, but rather to her possible death during the taking and retaking of the Palace of Justice. The failure to determine the whereabouts of Ms. Esguerra Forero does not, in itself, constitute forced disappearance. It represents a violation of the obligation to ensure rights that will be analyzed below (para. 327). Consequently, the Court concludes that, based on the existing evidence and for the effects of this Judgment, it is not possible to determine that Norma Constanza Esguerra Forero was forcibly disappeared. A.3.b) Ana Rosa Castiblanco Torres 318. Following the exhumation of the corpses in the mass grave in the South Cemetery, DNA tests were conducted and one of the human remains was identified as belonging to Ana Rosa Castiblanco Torres (supra para. 133). In the corresponding record of the removal of the corpse, it was established that the place of death was the fourth floor of the Palace of Justice, and that the body was “totally carbonized.” 496 The autopsy established that it was a “pregnant woman,” indicating that the “uterus [was] pregnant and partially carbonized [and the] fetus [was] also carbonized,” but could not establish the cause of death. 497 319. There is no dispute that the corpse returned to the next of kin corresponded to Ms. Castiblanco Torres. Nevertheless, owing to the errors committed in the removal of corpses, it was not possible to determine where she died with total certainty, notwithstanding the indications on the removal record. Furthermore, the Court reiterates that the discovery of the body in the mass grave does not necessarily mean that she died during the taking or the retaking of the Palace of Justice (supra para. 293). 320. However, the carbonized condition of the body of Ms. Castiblanco Torres is an important indication that very possibly she died as a result of the fire in the Palace of Justice during the retaking of the building, and not as a result of forced disappearance. The Court also reiterates that the failure to establish the whereabouts of her remains does not constitute a forced disappearance (supra para. 317). Consequently, as in the case of Norma Constanza Esguerra Forero, the Court finds that there are concrete elements, specific to this victim, that do not allow it to be concluded that Ana Rosa Castiblanco was forcibly disappeared. 495 Cf. Judgment of the Superior Court of Bogota of October 24, 2014 (evidence file, folio 38364). 496 Cf. Record of removal of corpse 1173/38 (evidence file, folios 30839 and 30840). 497 Cf. Autopsy report No. 3800-85 (evidence file, folios 30831 and 30832). 112