93 impunity, spreading feelings of helplessness and pessimism among the population.” 444 In addition, as indicated supra, the Final Report of the CVR established that “[m]ost of the victims state that the medical forensic examinations that were carried out by […] medical professionals were not rigorous; that is, they only performed the medical examinations as a mere formality. […] Also, the testimonies received by the [CVR] indicate [that the medical reports] did not record the evident signs of torture or the complaints of the victims who said they had been tortured.” It also indicated that “[t]he professional misconduct of forensic doctors has particularly egregious consequences in the cases of sexual violence, because they condemn the crime to impunity.” 445 264. Based on the above, the Court considers that the deficient way in which the State officials took statements about the acts of which Gladys Espinoza was a victim, the consistent refusal of the forensic doctors to identify the signs of torture and sexual violence that were evident on Gladys Espinoza, and the failure of those doctors to report them, as well as the lack of independence of the forensic doctors who evaluated Gladys Espinoza, had an adverse impact on the possible collection of evidence, contributing to the impunity that reigns in this case. B.1.2. The allegations of torture raised during the criminal proceedings against Gladys Espinoza in 2003 and 2004 and the application of gender-stereotyping by the judicial authorities 265. The Court observes that the judgment delivered by the National Terrorism Chamber on March 1, 2004, in the proceedings against Gladys Espinoza for the crime of terrorism refers to a police statement made by Gladys Espinoza, in which she affirmed that, during her detention, she had been “a victim of physical and psychological ill-treatment, as well as of sexual abuse by the individuals who were in charge of her.” 446 Furthermore, the ruling issued by the Permanent Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court on November 24, 2004, on the application for a declaration of nullity filed by Gladys Espinoza, the senior prosecutor, and the Attorney General’s Office, states that “Gladys Carol Espinoza Gonzáles […] affirm[ed] that, on police premises, she was the victim of sexual abuse and subjected to cruel and inhuman torture.” 447 The foregoing represent two new occasions on which the State was made aware of the torture and sexual violence perpetrated against Gladys Espinoza in 1993 during her detention on the premises of the DIVISE and the DINCOTE. 266. As the Court has already indicated, even when the acts of torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment have not been reported to the competent authorities by the victim, in any case in which there are indications that this has occurred, the State must open, ex officio and promptly, an impartial, independent and thorough investigation leading to the determination of the nature and origin of the injuries noted, together with the identification of those responsible, and their prosecution. 448 Also, the obligation to investigate gender-based violence was enhanced for Peru by the entry into force of the Convention of Belém do Pará on June 4, 2006. The Court notes that the judicial bodies mentioned above, and also the Public Prosecution Service and the Attorney General’s Office, failed to file any complaint or open any investigation to clarify the facts that were alleged by Gladys Espinoza, despite being aware of the acts against her personal integrity. 444 Informe Final de la Comisión de la Verdad y Reconciliación, supra, Volume VI, Chapter 1.4, pp. 222 a 224. 445 Informe Final de la Comisión de la Verdad y Reconciliación, supra, Volume VI, Chapter 1.4, p. 224. 446 Judgment of the National Terrorism Chamber of March 1, 2004 (evidence file, folios 6136 and 6140). 447 Final Judgment No. 1252-2004 of the Permanent Criminal Chamber of November 24, 2004 (evidence file, folio 6154). 448 Cf. Case of Gutiérrez Soler v. Colombia. Judgment of September 12, 2005. Series C No. 132, para. 54, and Case of J. v. Peru, supra, para. 347.