-42had not been carried out because the files were in disarray (supra February 4, 2002, the Chalatenango Trial Court issued an official this detachment for the inspection to be carried out. On March 1, Detachment authorized the inspection of the logbooks and records 1982. para. 48(63)). On communication to 2002, the Military it had kept during 48(66) On March 13, 2002, the Chalatenango Trial Court and the assigned prosecutor visited the No. 1 Military Detachment in that city to carry out the judicial inspection of the logbooks, files and records of this detachment, as indicated by that court in the official communication of February 4, 2002 (supra para. 48(65)). However, at the detachment, they were informed that the logbooks to be inspected were at the El Paraíso Fourth Infantry Brigade; accordingly, they went to this Brigade accompanied by a representative of the No. 1 Military Detachment of Chalatenango. They did not inspect the logbooks because “the Commander of [the said] Brigade […] state[d that …] before this could be done, authorization had to be requested from the Ministry of National Defense.” 48(67) On January 21, 2005, two days after the President of the Inter-American Court had requested the State to present information on any measures taken in the criminal proceedings since September 6, 2004 (supra para. 22), and approximately two years and ten months after the Commander of the Fourth Brigade had stated that authorization was required to inspect the logbooks (supra para. 48(66)), the prosecutor assigned to the proceedings requested the Chalatenango Trial Court to issue an official communication to the Ministry of National Defense requesting authorization to carry out the judicial inspection of the logbooks of the No. 1 Military Detachment. This inspection had been ordered by the court for the first time three years and seven months previously (supra para. 48(55)). On January 27, 2005, the Chalatenango Trial Court decided to issue an official communication to the Ministry of National Defense requesting authorization to carry out this inspection. The criminal case file does not record whether the communication was ever issued. d) Procedural measures relating to determination of the existence and identity of the alleged victims 48(68) On August 21, 2003, the National Civil Police sent official communication No. 027/03 to the Chalatenango Trial Court advising that an application had been filed against El Salvador before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, and that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs had therefore asked “all the State institutions that had intervened in any way, or could make any contribution, to part in” Case of the Serrano Cruz Sisters. Accordingly, the National Civil Police requested the Chalatenango Trial Court to provide a certified copy of the proceedings. 48(69) On January 11, 2002, a new prosecutor had taken over the investigation. Approximately one year and eight months later, on October 16, 2003, he took the first measures in the proceedings. These focused principally on an investigation of the Armed Forces’ records, because he believed that “there ha[d] to be something there.” However, in October 2003, the Deputy Ombudsman told him that he should visit the place where the Serrano Cruz family lived in 1982 and talk to the people. 48(70) On October 16, 22 and 23, 2003, almost one year and seven months after the last judicial action, the Chalatenango Trial Court summoned Ramón Miranda Cruz, Antonio Miranda Castro, Roque Miranda Ayala, Mardoqueo Franco Orellana and