28 76. Subsequently, José David Rivera Velásquez told José Rubén’s parents what had happened.91 The Armed Forces left the hill and the surrounding areas on May 19, 1983, and José Rubén’s father, among others, began searching for the children immediately. On May 21, 1983, the other children were found wandering alone in the hills.92 77. They found out that José Rubén had been seen while he was being taken away on the horse by soldiers. A relative of the child who was enlisted in the Fifth Infantry Brigade, with headquarters in the town of San Vicente, received information indicating that José Rubén had been seen in the barracks of the said Brigade following the operation, together with other children.93 Additionally, diverse testimonies given during the domestic proceedings indicated that the Armed Forces had been seen taking José Rubén Rivera Rivera away.94 78. Margarita de Dolores Rivera de Rivera took various steps, with her husband, Agustín Antonio Rivera Gálvez, to find their son.95 In November 1996, she denounced his disappearance before the Second Criminal Court of San Vicente (infra para. 138). In addition, she contacted the Search Association.96 On November 10, 2000, Margarita de Dolores Rivera de Rivera filed an application for habeas corpus before the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court (infra para. 159) 79. To date, the whereabouts of José Rubén Rivera Rivera are unknown. D. The forced disappearance of children as a multiple and continuing violation of human rights and of the obligation to respect and guarantee rights 80. The Court considers it appropriate to reiterate the legal grounds that support an integral perspective with regard to the forced disappearance of persons owing to the plurality of conducts that, united with a single purpose, permanently violate legal rights San Vicente on November 29, 1996 (evidence file, volume III, attachment 43 to the application, folio 2412); Sworn statement of David Antonio Rivera Velásquez made before notary public on December 5, 2005 (evidence file, volume VI, attachment 29 to the pleadings, motions and evidence brief, folios 4129 to 4135), and Testimony of David Antonio Rivera Velásquez before the Second Trial Court of San Vicente (evidence file, volume X, attachment 5 to the answer to the application, folios 7153 and 7154). 91 Cf. Statement made by Margarita de Dolores Rivera de Rivera, supra note 83 (evidence file, volume XI, affidavits, folio 7466); Statement made by Agustín Antonio Rivera Gálvez, supra note 86 (evidence file, volume XI, affidavits, folio 7475); Decision issued by the Ombudsman’s Office, supra note 70 (evidence file, volume III, attachment 15 to the application, folio 2214), and Aggrieved party’s statement made by Margarita de Dolores Rivera de Rivera, supra note 90. 92 Cf. Decision issued by the Ombudsman’s Office, supra note 70 (evidence file, volume III, attachment 15 to the application, folio 2214). 93 Cf. Decision issued by the Ombudsman’s Office, supra note 70 (evidence file, volume III, attachment 15 to the application, folio 2214). 94 Cf. Aggrieved party’s statement made by Margarita de Dolores Rivera de Rivera, supra note 90; Testimony of José Vidal Rivera Rivas, supra note 90; Testimony of Carlota Romero before the Second Criminal Court of San Vicente on November 27, 1996 (evidence file, volume III, attachment 41 to the application, folio 2396), and Sworn statement of Carlota Moreno made before notary public on November 29, 2005 (evidence file, volume III, attachment 42 to the application, folio 2400). 95 Cf. Statement made by Margarita de Dolores Rivera de Rivera, supra note 83 (evidence file, volume XI, affidavits, folio 7467), and Statement made by Agustín Antonio Rivera Gálvez, supra note 86 (evidence file, volume XI, affidavits, folio 7476). 96 Cf. Statement made by Margarita de Dolores Rivera de Rivera, supra note 83 (evidence file, volume XI, affidavits, folio 7467), and Statement made by Agustín Antonio Rivera Gálvez, supra note 86 (evidence file, volume XI, affidavits, folio 7476).