55 148. In this regard, it should be noted that, in July 2001, the United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child stated with regard to Guatemala that it was “deeply disturbed by information that violence against children is increasing,” and recommended to Guatemala that it “take, as a matter of the highest priority, all the necessary steps to prevent these serious violations of children’s rights and to ensure that they are properly investigated.”240 149. In view of the context in which the events of the case occurred, the fact that María Isabel was female is a factor in the above-mentioned conclusion. Thus, as indicated (supra para. 81), in December 2001, in the context of the increase in the number of murders, the occurrence of the murder of women for reasons of gender was not exceptional. In this regard it should be emphasized that, in April 2001, the Inter-American Commission issued a report in which it expressed its concern due to the gender-based violence in Guatemala. On that occasion, the Commission also made recommendations to Guatemala in order to achieve for the “victims” of gender-based violence,” an increase in “the sensitivity and effectiveness of the response” of “the officials” who “were responsible for receiving the complaints,” “particularly [of] the National Civil Police and of the Public Prosecution Service.”241 150. The insufficiency of statistical information on violence against women has even been indicated by the Coordinating Body for the Prevention, Punishment and Eradication of Family Violence and Violence against Women (CONAPREVI), a State entity (supra para. 71, and infra footnote 244). This does not necessarily signify that the State was unaware of this context in December 2001, because the evidence includes relevant data, from both State databases and those of State entities, as well as the ruling of an international agency working in this area (supra paras. 76 and 79). Furthermore, prior to 2001, the State had adopted measures relating to the situation and to discrimination against women, and the creation of CONAPREVI in November 2000 (supra footnote 93) was especially relevant for the problem of violence against women. In addition, despite what CONAPREVI indicated, Guatemala has reported that it had agencies created before December 2001 whose functions included “monitoring the implementation” of the Convention of Belém do Pará.242 151. In addition, it should be pointed out that, even before December 2001, the State had the obligation to take the necessary measures to obtain sufficient information on the situation of the rights of girl children in Guatemala, at least at the minimum level required to be able to meet satisfactorily its obligations at that time. Because it is evident that in order to comply satisfactorily with the obligations established in Articles 1(1) and 2 of the American Convention, States must obtain pertinent information on the situation of the treaty-based rights, since this is necessary to be able to evaluate the measures or actions that must be taken. This is relevant in relation to the rights of girl children. 243 It also 240 Concluding observations of the Committee on the Rights of the Child: Guatemala. Twenty-seventh session CRC/C/15/Add.154, 9 July 2001, paras. 30 and 31. 241 IACHR, Follow-up Report on the compliance by the State of Guatemala with the recommendations made by the Commission in the Fifth Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Guatemala, of December 18, 2002, para. 53. 242 In response to the question posed by MESECVI of whether “[a] domestic mechanism has been established to follow up on the implementation of the Convention of Belém Do Pará,” the State reported that “[p]ursuant to article 13 of the Law to Prevent, Eradicate and Punish Family Violence, Decree 97-96 of the Congress of the Republic, the Attorney General’s Office is the entity responsible for monitoring compliance with the Inter-American Convention for the Prevention, Punishment and Eradication of Violence against Women. According to article 11(c) of the regulations to the Law to Prevent, Eradicate and Punish Family Violence, Government decision No. 8312000, the Coordinating Body for the Prevention, Punishment and Eradication of Family Violence and Violence against Women [(CONAPREVI)], is responsible for monitoring compliance with the Inter-American Convention for the Prevention, Punishment and Eradication of Violence against Women.” Convention of Belém do Pará. MESECVIII/doc.31/08. Second Conference of States parties. June 24, 2008. Doc. OEA/Ser.L/II.7.10, pp. 56 and 57. 243 The Committee on the Rights of the Child has said that the implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child requires “rigorous monitoring” and, inter alia, the elaboration of a “rights-based national strategy, rooted in [that] Convention,” and that this “strategy will need to include arrangements for monitoring and continuous review, for regular updating and for periodic reports to parliament and to the public.” It has also stated