54 Castro, 204 Gómez Palomino 205 and La Cantuta, 206 all against Peru and all involving the forced disappearance of victims, the Court took into account that, in accordance with the CVR’s Final Report, the methods used to destroy evidence of the crimes committed during the Peruvian armed conflict included, inter alia, the mutilation, incineration, abandonment or burial of the mortal remains of victims in inaccessible or isolated areas, as well as the scattering of remains in different places. 207 Thus, the Court notes that the aforementioned modus operandi coincides with the one used in the present case, which, for the purpose of determining what happened to the victims, constitutes an indication of their possible forced disappearance. c) Uncertainty regarding the evidence collected on July 18, 1991 171. The search and recovery of remains was carried out on July 18, 1991, and on the following day they were identified as 19 pieces of probable human remains. Although these remains were sent to the Medical Examiner, there is no evidence of any subsequent steps taken to identify to whom they belonged. That same day, dynamite cartridges, pieces of fuse and other remains were also found and were sent to the Departmental Headquarters of the Cercado Technical Police for investigation. There is no evidence of any subsequent procedure in this regard. Moreover, being in State custody, it is still unknown what has happened to the evidence collected, as reported by the State (supra para. 101). 172. Given the military authorities’ refusal to acknowledge the detention of the victims during the first days after the events and the modus operandi used to destroy the evidence, the Court considers that the current uncertainty about the fate of the human remains and evidence found in 1991 is not an isolated fact; on the contrary, if this actually occurred, it contributed to the refusal by the State authorities to provide information and reveal the fate or whereabouts of the victims, which constitutes an additional indication of what happened to them. d) Registration of death certificates in 1991 and 1992 173. It is a proven fact that in December 1991, the death certificates of two victims in this case were registered, with the date of death given as July 4, 1991. These certificates also showed that the deaths were accredited with a medical certificate, which clearly did not occur. In March 1992, the death certificates of another twelve victims in this case were registered, which also stated the date of death as July 4, 1991. These records were made by order of the judge of the Sixth Permanent Military Tribunal of Ayacucho and the six children were reported to be over 18 years old (supra para. 107). In this regard, the judgment of February 9, 2012, issued by the National Criminal Chamber of the Superior Court of Justice of Lima, considered that “an attempt was made to conceal the real ages of the victims, for which the military jurisdiction ordered the registration of the death certificates with ages ranging from 19 to 42 years, ages that would allow them to claim that the deaths were the result of an armed confrontation with subversive elements.” 208 174. The irregularities in the manner in which the death certificates were registered in December 1991, together with the details included therein, in the context of the investigation and military criminal proceedings, constituted an additional element that created uncertainty regarding the fate of the fifteen victims in the case. e) Search, recovery and eventual identification of the human skeletal remains recovered 204 205 206 207 208 Cf. Cf. Cf. Cf. Cf. Case of Anzualdo Castro v. Peru, supra, para. 83. Case of Gómez Palomino v. Peru, supra, para. 54.2. Case of La Cantuta v. Peru, supra, para. 80.8. Final Report of the CVR of Peru, Volume VI, Chapter 1(2), pages 71, 72 and 114. Judgment of the National Criminal Chamber of February 9, 2012 (evidence file, folio 4541).