Paola Alvarado Espinoza, Rocío Irene Alvarado Reyes, and José Ángel Alvarado Herrera.216 On the date, complaint file CNDH/2/2010/108/Q was opened, with the deputy investigators going into the field to collect witness statements and documents217 and to request information from various State bodies which provided their respective replies.218 172. Based on the foregoing, on June 30, 2011, the CNDH issued recommendation 43/11, addressed to the Secretary of National Defense, the Federal Secretary of Public Security, and the Governor of the State of Chihuahua219. In said recommendation, the CNDH determined that: The logical and legal analysis of the body of evidence collected by this National Commission points to violations of the human right to legality and legal security, to liberty, to humane treatment and personal safety, to access to justice, and to due process, by acts consisting of arbitrary detention and forced disappearance to the detriment of V1, V2, and V3, attributable to public servants of the Secretariat of National Defense and the Federal Police.220 173. The CNDH took into account the situation of militarization in Buenaventura, Chihuahua, with the deployment of about 3,000 public security troops who were investigating the deaths of José Alfredo Silly Peña, a Federal Police Commander, and the three Federal Police officers who accompanied him; and recognized that that situation helped determine who might have been involved in the disappearance of Nitza Paola Alvarado Espinoza, Rocío Irene Alvarado Reyes, and José Ángel Alvarado Herrera, and the possible reasons for their detention.221 174. The CNDH also assessed the testimony of relatives who, as eye witnesses, declared that Nitza Paola Alvarado Espinoza, José Ángel Alvarado Herrera, and Rocío Irene Alvarado Reyes were detained by military personnel, and it considered that all the eye witness accounts were consistent in their descriptions of the time, manner, and place of the disappearance and were clear and precise, without any contradictions.222 175. The CNDH also points out that some of the State agents who made statements, such as Juan Manuel Rojas Díaz, of the Command Post of the Joint Chihuahua Operation, and Vázquez Orozco, Commander of the 35th Infantry Battalion in Nuevo Casas Grandes,223 “did not present evidence to prove the activities 216 Annex XX. National Human Rights Commission headquartered in Ciudad Juárez, Chihuahua. Complaint. Annex No. 4 to the petitioners’ brief received on June 26, 2011; Annex I. Case file. Volume I. Complaint lodged by Jaime Alvarado Herrera with the CNDH on January 4, 2010, page 26 of the pdf. (Annex to the petitioners’ observations on the merits received on November 3, 2014). 217 Annex XX. Petitioners’ brief submitted as part of the MP 10-10 proceedings before the I/A Court H.R., September 7, 2011. Annex No. 3, CNDH - Recommendation 43/11; Annex I. Case file. Volume XII. Complaint lodged by the CNDH to the Attorney General for Military Justice on September 9, 2011, page 22 of the pdf. (Annex to the petitioners’ observations on the merits received on November 3, 2014). 218 Annex XX. Petitioners’ brief submitted as part of the MP 10-10 proceedings before the I/A Court H.R., September 7, 2011. Annex No. 3, CNDH - Recommendation 43/11. In this file, information was sought from SEDENA, the Federal Secretariat for Public Security, the PGR, the PGJE, the heads of the prosecuting agencies of the 31 states of the Republic of Mexico and the Federal District, the head of the Decentralized Administrative Organ for Prevention and Social Rehabilitation of the Subsecretariat for the Federal Prison System, and the head of the entities responsible for organizing, coordinating, and supervising the prison system of the 31 states of the Republic of Mexico and the Federal District, 219 Annex I. Case file. Volume I, Recommendation 43/11 issued by the CNDH, page 46 of the pdf. (Annex to the petitioners’ observations on the merits received on November 3, 2014). 220 Annex I. Case file. Volume I, Recommendation 43/11 issued by the CNDH, page 46 of the pdf. (Annex to the petitioners’ observations on the merits received on November 3, 2014). The keys to this recommendation are located in Annex I. Case file. Volume I, Recommendation 43/11 issued by the CNDH, page 137 of the pdf. (Annex to the petitioners’ observations on the merits received on November 3, 2014). 221 Annex I. Case file. Volume I, Recommendation 43/11 issued by the CNDH, page 61 of the pdf. (Annex to the petitioners’ observations on the merits received on November 3, 2014). 222 Annex I. Case file. Volume I, Recommendation 43/11 issued by the CNDH, page 66 of the pdf. (Annex to the petitioners’ observations on the merits received on November 3, 2014). 223 Annex I. Case file. Volume I, Recommendation 43/11 issued by the CNDH, page 46 of the pdf. (Annex to the petitioners’ observations on the merits received on November 3, 2014).