-34identity of the alleged victims. During the investigation, the court did not order and the prosecutors did not request any records in relation to orphanages or children’s homes, despite the information received from the Red Cross (supra para. 48(18)), nor did they try to summon the members of the Army named by the alleged victims’ mother to make statements (supra para. 48(15)). a) Testimonial statements of the mother and a sister of the alleged victims, and summons of a deceased person 48(28) On May 6, 1996, the Chalatenango Trial Court ordered that the statement made before that Court by María Victoria Cruz Franco should be expanded, to provide “new information […] and witnesses who c[ould] testify about the abduction of her […] daughters, Ernestina Serrano and [E]rlinda Serrano.” On June 4, 1996, María Victoria Cruz Franco stated that “she c[ould] not provide any new information or witnesses who could testify in that regard,” but “she believe[d] that her daughters had been adopted by foreigners and hope[d] that they w[ould] return as had many of the disappeared.” On July 11, 1996, María Victoria Cruz Franco appeared before the Chalatenango Trial Court and stated that two new witnesses, Esperanza Franco Orellana and Suyapa Serrano Cruz, could testify about the abduction of her daughters; she gave their addresses. Seven months later, the alleged victims’ mother was summoned by that court to “provide the exact address of the witness, Esperanza Franco”; at which time, she declared that “she d[id] not know the exact address […], but would make the necessary inquiries.” 48(29) On June 7, 1996, the Chalatenango Trial Court found that “the […] investigation had been sufficient.” It therefore granted a hearing to the prosecutor “so that it could decide on the merits of the evidence.” On June 19, 1996, even though Victoria Cruz Franco had stated in her petition for habeas corpus (supra para. 48(15)) that the witness, Paula Serrano, was deceased, the prosecutor assigned to the case decided that the case had not been “sufficiently investigated,” because the witness, Paula Serrano, had not testified. On July 4, 1996, the Chalatenango Trial Court considered that the summons of Paula Serrano had been complied with “as she did not live in the village [of San José de las Flores] and her whereabouts were unknown,” according to information supplied by the local magistrate’s court. 48(30) On July 19, 1996, Suyapa Serrano Cruz gave testimony before the Chalatenango Trial Court, and stated that some “soldiers […] took her sisters” during a 1982 military operation in Los Alvarenga canton, Nueva Trinidad jurisdiction, Chalatenango Department, and provided the address of Esperanza Franco Orellana, proposed as a witness by the alleged victims’ mother (supra para. 48(28)). b) Procedural actions related to the International Committee of the Red Cross, the Salvadoran Red Cross, a hospital, and the Attorney General’s office 48(31) Neither the Chalatenango Trial Court nor the prosecutor requested any information from the institutions named in the document that the head of the Salvadoran Red Cross Tracing Office submitted during the habeas corpus proceeding (supra para. 48(18)), to the officer executing that recourse. The document gave the names of the places where the 52 children who had been brought by this institution from Chalatenango under the program to provide counseling and care to the