20. With regard to José Rubén Rivera Rivera, the Court takes note of and appreciates the information forwarded by the State which makes a start on the execution of this aspect of the reparation, in the sense that the State: (i) is working with the biological family, based on a psychosocial approach, in order to prepare them for a possible reunion; (ii) is supporting the migratory procedures that will permit this, and (iii) has indicated its willingness to cover the costs of his travel to El Salvador with State resources. Based on this information, the Court will continue monitoring this measure of reparation. 21. Regarding the determination of the whereabouts of Julia Inés Contreras, as well as that of the sisters Ana Julia Mejía Ramírez and Carmelina Mejía Ramírez, the Court recalls that, according to paragraph 191 of the Judgment, the State must continue to carry out a genuine search in which it makes every possible effort to determine the whereabouts, and this “should be done systematically and rigorously, with all the adequate and appropriate human, technical and scientific resources and, if necessary, cooperation should be requested from other States and international organizations. The said measures must be reported to the next of kin and, where possible, their presence should be secured.” In this regard, although it can be inferred that various interviews have been conducted in the context of the investigation of the National Search Commission, the Court does not have other information that would allow it to assess the degree of progress towards compliance with the reparation ordered in the Judgment in relation to these victims. 22. Based on the above, the Court finds that the obligation to determine the whereabouts of Serapio Cristian Contreras and José Rubén Rivera Rivera has been complied with fully, as well as to guarantee the family reunion of the former. Furthermore, owing to the obligations that remain pending, the Court considers it essential that the State present complete, detailed and updated information, with copies of the corresponding documents, on: (a) the measures to restore the identity of Serapio Cristian Contreras and the psychosocial assistance provided, if he desired this; (b) the measures taken for the reunion of José Rubén Rivera Rivera with his biological family, the psychosocial assistance provided, the restitution of his identity and the family reunion, if he desires this, and (c) the procedures and measures undertaken in order to determine the whereabouts of Julia Inés Contreras, and the sisters Ana Julia Mejía Ramírez and Carmelina Mejía Ramírez. c) Obligations to adopt all the appropriate and necessary measures to restore the identity of Gregoria Herminia Contreras, including her first and last name, as well as her other personal data; to activate and use the available diplomatic mechanisms to coordinate cooperation with the Republic of Guatemala in order to facilitate the correction of the identity of Gregoria Herminia Contreras, including her first and last name and other data in the records of that State; and to guarantee the conditions for the return of Gregoria Herminia Contreras should she decide to return to El Salvador permanently (fourth operative paragraph of the Judgment) 23. The State advised that “measures to prove invalid filiation” were taken in the Second Family Court of Santa Ana, through the Attorney General’s Office, in order to annul the birth certificate that was registered fraudulently in the Mayor’s Office of Santa Ana and, in which, the victim is attributed with the name of Gregoria de Jesús Molina. A preliminary hearing in this judicial proceeding was held on December 19, 2011; a DNA test was performed on January 10, 2012, and on February 10, 2012, the sentencing hearing was held, during which Fermín Recinos voluntarily acknowledged paternity of Gregoria Herminia Contreras, whose presence at each procedural stage of the proceedings was ensured by the State covering the costs of her travel from Guatemala and her stay in El Salvador. This judgment declared “invalid the filiation contained in the [said] fraudulently registered birth certificate,” 9