35 4,456 women were reported to have disappeared and, at December 31, 2005, 34 women were yet to be found.95 120. The Observatorio Ciudadano questioned this figure and indicated that there was “strong evidence that […] the human remains corresponded to more than the 34 women believed by the [Special Prosecutor’s Office], because what was presumed to be the skeletal remains of a single individual, has turned out to be the remains of more than 60.” It added that the information on which the investigation of the Special Prosecutor’s Office is based “is totally inaccessible to private individuals; consequently, it is virtually impossible to compare the sources and the consistency of the data used by the [Special Prosecutor’s Office].”96 The CNDH made a similar statement in 2003, although not in relation to the numbers provided by the Special Prosecutor’s Office, and indicated that it had noted “the lack of diligence with which measures have been taken by the [Office of the Attorney General of the state of Chihuahua], in the cases of women who have been reported missing” and that the reports provided by the authorities to the CNDH differed from those provided to international agencies. The CNDH also indicated that, when it officially requested information on the current status of the investigations, “it had been told that “it was impossible to know what had happened in 2,415 cases, because ‘the case files were not physically available’.”97 121. The Court takes note that there are no reliable assumptions about the number of murders and disappearances of women in Ciudad Juárez, and observes that, whatever the number, it is alarming. Over and above the numbers which, although significant, are not sufficient to understand the seriousness of the problem of violence experienced by some women in Ciudad Juárez, the arguments of the parties, together with the evidence they have provided, indicate a complex phenomenon, accepted by the State (supra para. 115), of violence against women since 1993, characterized by specific factors that this Court considers it important to highlight. 1.3. Victims 122. In the first place, the Commission and the representatives alleged that the victims were young women aged 15 to 25 years, students or workers in the maquila industries or in stores or other local businesses, some of whom had only lived in Ciudad Juárez for a relatively short time. The State did not make any comment in this regard. 123. The plaintiffs’ allegations were based on different reports prepared by national and international agencies establishing that the murder victims appeared to be, above all, young women,98 including girls,99 women workers – especially those working in the maquilas100 – who are underprivileged,101 students102 or migrants.103 95 Cf. Office of the Special Prosecutor for the Investigation of Crimes related to the Murders of Women in Ciudad Juárez, Informe Final, supra note 87, folios 14543, 14661, 14584 and 14587, and CNDH, Segundo Informe de Evaluación Integral, supra note 72, folio 4667. 96 Final report of the Observatorio Ciudadano, supra note 81, folios 6650 and 6659. 97 CNDH, Informe Especial, supra note 66, folio 2238. 98 Cf. IACHR, The Situation of the Rights of Women in Ciudad Juárez, supra note 64, folio 1744; Report on Mexico produced by CEDAW, supra note 64, folios 1924 and 1926; Report of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, supra note 73, folio 2052; Amnesty International, Intolerable killings, supra note 64, folios 2256 and 2271, and Office of the Special Prosecutor for the Investigation of Crimes related to the Murders of Women in Ciudad Juárez, Informe Final, supra note 87, folio 14605. 99 Cf. IACHR, The Situation of the Rights of Women in Ciudad Juárez, supra note 64, folio 1764; Amnesty International, Intolerable killings, supra note 64, folios 2256 and 2271, and testimony given before