32 2,335 went to trial; in other words, 0.39%.104 The Inter-American Commission has indicated that “[i]t has been stated that, of the 8,989 complaints received by the Office of the Prosecutor for matters concerning women at the end of 2001, only three concluded with convictions.”105 Similarly, it has been indicated that, “of the 1,227 cases of the murder of women reported between 2002 and 2004, only seven have achieved a conviction”;106 that is, 0.57%. The general situation described, of a high rate of failure to punish violent acts against women, continued at least until the beginning of 2012.107 89. The absence of effective punishment of crimes in general may be related to shortcomings in the investigations. Nevertheless, State agencies, as well as national and international civil society organizations have indicated that it is usual for investigations into violent attacks on women to have certain defects, such as the absence of measures to protect, examine, and preserve the crime scene;108 errors in the chain of custody of the evidence, and failure to examine signs of violence.109 In this regard, the State indicated 104 Committee for the Elimination of Discrimination against Women. Pre-session working group. Thirty-fifth session, 15 May to 2 June 2006. Responses to the list of issues and questions for consideration of the sixth periodic report. Guatemala, supra. 105 Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, “Fifth Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Guatemala,” supra. In addition, the Inter-American Commission’s Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Women has stated that “[o]ne serious outcome of the cycle of violence against women is the impunity associated with those violations of the fundamental rights of women. Both state authorities as well as representatives of civil society said repeatedly […] that the system for administering justice had not responded effectively to those crimes […]. The delegation [of the Special Rapporteur…], after visits to the civil police, the Prosecutor’s Office (Office for Crimes against Women, Office for Care of Victims), the morgue, and to the judiciary, [… verified] that the justice required is not found. Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, Press communiqué 20/04, “The IACHR Special Rapporteur evaluates the effectiveness of the right of women in Guatemala to live free from violence and discrimination,” supra, para. 17. In 2006, the United Nations Committee for the Elimination of Discrimination against Women expressed its “concern” owing to the “deeply-rooted culture of impunity for” crimes of the “disappearance, violation, torture and murder” of women. Committee for the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, thirty-fifth session, 15 May to 2 June 2006, supra, para. 23. 106 International Federation for Human Rights. International Investigation Mission, “El femicidio en Mexico y Guatemala”, supra. 107 According to the National Judicial Documentation and Analysis Center (CENADOJ), in 2005, 488 cases of violent deaths of women and children entered the system, 65 judgments were delivered and a conviction was handed down in 46 of these. In 2006, there were 482 cases, 70 judgments were delivered more than half of which handed down a conviction. In 2009, there were 635 cases and 82 judgments were delivered, 44 of them handing down a conviction. In addition, between September 2008, when the Law against Femicide entered into force (supra footnote 68), and March 2012, 69,909 cases for the offenses established in that law (femicide, violence against women, and economic violence) were filed in the criminal courts. Over the same period, 772 judgments were delivered for these offenses; in other words, 1.10%. Cf. National Judicial Documentation and Analysis Center (CENADOJ), Judicial Statistics and Documentation Section, Report on cases filed and judgments delivered by the criminal courts, Tables of cases filed for offenses establish in the Law against Femicide, corresponding to 2008 – 2010, 2011 and January to March 2012 (file of annexes to the motions and arguments brief, annexes 88, 89 and 90, fs. 10,760 to 10,763, 10,765, 10,766, 10,768 and 10,769, respectively). Despite the above, it should be stressed that, according to uncontested data presented by the State in its answering brief, in 2011 and 2012, there was a decrease in “complaints [or] indictments” relating to sexual offenses against women and, in parallel, an increase in the judgments concerning such cases from 227 to 168. Cf. “Table of proceedings for sexual offenses, women and children, 2011-2012” (file of annexes to the answering brief, annex 7, f. 14,013). In the latter document, the State also presented data on indictments and judgments on “sexual matters” concerning “girls [and] boys.” Indicating that, in 2011, there were 523 “indictments” and 302 judgments, and that, during 2012, up until December 18 that year (the date of the answering brief), these figures were 499 and 305, respectively. 108 The expert witnesses José Mario Nájera Ochoa Eugenia Solís García expressed a similar opinion. Cf. Expert opinion of José Mario Nájera Ochoa provided by affidavit dated April 23, 2013 (file of preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs, fs. 873 to 878), and Expert opinion of María Eugenia Solís García, supra. 109 Expert witness María Eugenia Solís García made a similar observation. Cf. Expert opinion of María Eugenia Solís García, supra. Meanwhile, expert witness José Mario Nájera Ochoa indicated that “[t]here are no specific protocols for recovering the corpses of women; this is done on the basis of general instructions that are used for both women and men, with the sole addition of taking swabs, scraping under the nails, and determining whether the victim was pregnant. This is significant because the violent deaths of women have […] special aspects that should be taken into account when processing the scene.” Cf. Expert opinion of José Mario Nájera Ochoa, supra.