54. In relation to health care, the Ministry of Health began to provide antiretroviral drugs in 1999. According to information provided to the Court, in 2007 and 2008, with financing from the Global Fund, the coverage of antiretroviral treatment in Guatemala was 43%. In 2013, the Planning Secretariat of the Office of the President of the Republic of Guatemala indicated that approximately 50% of the estimated population (adults and children) living with HIV were receiving antiretroviral treatment. In this regard, the Ministry of Health has stressed the need to reposition the goal of universal access at the political level and cover a greater percentage of those needing antiretroviral treatment in Guatemala.40 B. The presumed victims and their next of kin 55. The Court recalls that this case refers to 49 presumed victims living with HIV in Guatemala and their next of kin, who are divided into three groups: 41 those who are already deceased, those who are still alive, and their next of kin. Owing to the importance of evaluating the specific circumstances of each of the 49 presumed victims in order to analyze the medical treatment provided by the State after 2004, Annex 3 to this judgment contains a description of the proven facts in relation to each of them, and lists their next of kin. In this regard, the Court notes that, due to the number of presumed victims, the time that has elapsed since they were diagnosed with HIV, the remoteness of the place of residence of some of them, their socio-economic situation, the absence of their medical records, and since the State has not contested the facts presented by the Commission and the representatives, the Court finds it pertinent to accord greater probative value to the statements of the presumed victims and to the information submitted by the doctors who have accompanied them throughout their illness and the proceedings before the Commission and the Court. Consequently, the Court has considered as accepted the facts that were not expressly denied by the State, while the contrary has not appeared in the case file and, if this is so, it has described the facts that are consistent with the evidence provided by the Commission, the representatives and the State, including the corresponding citation.42 C. Actions and appeals filed by the presumed victims C.1. Letters addressed to the President and other authorities Cf. National Program for the Prevention and Control of Sexually Transmitted Infections (STI), the Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) and the Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome (AIDS) (evidence file, folio 8750); Dra. Laura León Noriega, Diagnóstico de Situación y Respuesta al VIH-SIDA. Análisis y Conclusiones, Guatemala, January 2008 (evidence file, folio 9050); Planning Secretariat of the Office of the President of the Republic of Guatemala, Progress Report 2013. Population and Social Development Policy (evidence file, folios 9133 and 9189), and National Report on advances in the fight against HIV and AIDS, 2004 (evidence file, folio 8827). 40 41 See table in annex 1 to this judgment. Cf. Case of the Members of the village of Chichupac and neighboring communities of the Municipality of Rabinal v. Guatemala. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 30, 2016. Series C No. 328, para. 75. The Court considered that the information forwarded by the Commission and the representatives with the regard to the presumed victims who are now deceased was provided in good faith. The Court also took into consideration that the State did not expressly deny that those individuals had died or provide any evidence in this regard. Moreover, on August 8, 2018, the Court requested the State, as helpful evidence, to forward information and/or documentation relating to the death certificates of: 1) Alberto Quiché Cuxeva, 2) Facundo Gómez Reyes, 3) Juana Aguilar, 4) Marvin Josué Lucas González, 5) Rita Mariana Dubón Orozco, 6) Roberto Gómez García, 7) José Rubén Delgado López, 8) Petrona López, and 9) Reina López Mujica. The State, in a brief of August 21, 2018, indicated that it was unable to forward the evidence requested by the Court. Consequently, the Court considered proved that the said presumed victims were deceased. 42 18