46 note that the State did not specify what it understands by “concluded”162 and that, in this regard, in its answer to the CEDAW report, it stated that, up until 2004, of the 92 sexual offenses committed, sentences had been handed down in only four cases.163 162. The Ciudad Juárez Commission, for its part, underscored that “[t]he most surprising element of these cases [of murders of women] is the impunity that still exists in many of those classified as sexual and/or serial.”164 According to CEDAW, in the cases linked to domestic violence or common crime, the Mexican authorities maintained that progress had been made in the investigation, identification and prosecution of the accused and that most of those convicted had been sentenced to more than 20 years in prison, while that in cases of acts of sexual violence, “[t]here are persons who are imprisoned for seven years, others for five and, although the Law establishes that the term of the sentence should be two years, files are sometimes incomplete and the judges are not convinced by the evidence.”165 Moreover, the U.N. Special Rapporteur on violence against women has indicated that the percentage of prison sentences for sexual crimes is lower than for the other crimes against women, representing 33.3% and 46.7%, respectively.166 163. Lastly, the Tribunal observes that some reports indicate that impunity is related to discrimination against women. Thus, for example, the Report of the IACHR Rapporteur concludes that “[w]hen the perpetrators are not held to account, as has generally been the situation in Ciudad Juárez, the impunity confirms that such violence and discrimination is acceptable, thereby fueling its perpetuation.”167 Similarly, the U.N. Rapporteur on extrajudicial executions states that: “[t]he events in Ciudad Juárez thus constitute a typical case of gender-based crimes which thrive on impunity.”168 1.8. The Court’s conclusions 164. Based on the foregoing, the Court concludes that, since 1993, there has been an increase in the murders of women, with at least 264 victims up until 2001, and 379 up to 2005. However, besides these figures, which the Tribunal notes are unreliable, it is a matter of concern that some of these crimes appear to have involved extreme 162 In general, regarding the cases that the State refers to as “concluded”, CEDAW indicated in its 2005 report that it was concerned about the fact that cases are considered, and recorded, as having been concluded or solved when they are brought before the courts, “even though the accused have neither been arrested nor punished” (Report on Mexico produced by CEDAW, supra note 64, folio 1950). Furthermore, and also in general, in its 2005 report, the CNDH indicated that it had “obtained sufficient information to disprove the affirmations of the PGJE [Office of the Attorney General of the state of Chihuahua], that cases had been solved without any legal grounds to support these assertions” (CNDH, Informe Especial, supra note 66, folio 2234). 163 Cf. Report on Mexico produced by CEDAW, supra note 64, folio 1964. In this regard, it should be noted that, in its report, CEDAW indicated: “The Government assures us that judgments have been rendered in only 4 of the 90 cases considered to involve sexual violence, whereas nearly all of the civil society sources state that those 4 cases have not been resolved either, and that some of the accused may not be guilty. After eight years, only one prisoner has been convicted and punished, and that case is still in the appeal phase.” (Report on Mexico produced by CEDAW, supra note 64, folio 1934). 164 Comisión para Prevenir y Erradicar la Violencia contra las Mujeres en Ciudad Juárez, Tercer informe de gestión, supra note 101, folio 8997 (citing the second progress report, entitled “El feminicidio: formas de ejercer la violencia contra las mujeres). 165 Report on Mexico produced by CEDAW, supra note 64, folio 1931. 166 Cf. Report of the Special Rapporteur on violence against women, supra note 64, folio 2012. 167 IACHR, The Situation of the Rights of Women in Ciudad Juárez, supra note 64, folio 1766. 168 Report of the Special Rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, supra note 73, folio 2053.