4 * * 8. The State informed the Court that it had effected a change in the State’s actions towards compliance with the Judgment by maintaining an open and participatory dialogue with the victims through their representatives, especially the Asociación ProBúsqueda de Niñas y Niños Desaparecidos (Association for the Search for Disappeared Children) (hereinafter “Asociación Pro-Búsqueda”). In addition, the State reported that, during the public ceremony held on January 16, 2010 to commemorate the 18th Anniversary of the signing of the Peace Accords, the President of El Salvador declared that national reconciliation cannot be achieved by denying the past, but through truth and justice and publicly acknowledged the responsibility of the State for the serious human rights violations and abuse of power committed by state agents during the internal armed conflict that ended in 1992. The President of El Salvador apologized to those who had not been able to "mourn their loss [because] they do not know the whereabouts of their loved ones” and to those who during those years had suffered with no protection from government agencies. Finally, he promised to provide its fullest and ceaseless cooperation to the relevant national and international authorities that investigate cases involving human rights violations. 9. The representatives acknowledged the State’s goodwill, the spirit of cooperation and dialogue to ensure compliance with some of the reparations ordered in the Judgment. Likewise, Suyapa Serrano-Cruz, sister of the disappeared victims, stated that she felt good about the President’s apology and acknowledgment of “the many tragic events which occurred in the country.” 10. The Commission also appreciated the goodwill expressed by El Salvador and stated that “[s]uch goodwill has resulted in some progress, which the Commission regards as the first step towards compliance with the Judgment.” 11. The Court notes that, in its September 22, 2006 Order, it found that the requirement to hold a public ceremony to acknowledge the State’s responsibility ordered in the Judgment had been complied with by the event that took place on March 22, 2006.6 Nevertheless, the Court appreciates the apology made by the President of the Republic to the victims of human rights violations as well as the State’s efforts to maintain a close and open dialogue with the victims in order to work towards compliance with the Judgment in the instant case. The Court considers it essential that the goodwill expressed by the head of the Executive Branch be translated into prompt compliance with the obligations derived from the Judgment, with the active participation of all government bodies concerned. * * * 12. In relation to the obligation to investigate into the facts of the case, identify and punish those responsible, and conduct a genuine search for the victims (sixth operative paragraph of the Judgment), the State admitted that “there has been no significant progress in [the] investigation.” The information reported so far by the Prosecutor’s Office centered around the appearance of two former high-ranking army officials as 6 Cf. Case of the Serrano-Cruz Sisters v. El Salvador. Monitoring Compliance with Judgment. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of September 22, 2006, Considering clause No. 9.