be defined exhaustively,218 but comprises, among other protected spheres, sexual life219 and the right to establish and develop relationships with other human beings. 220 The Court considers that the rape perpetrated against the young women in the village of El Mozote violated essential values and aspects of their private lives, meant an interference in their sexual life, and annulled their right to make free decisions with regard to with whom they wished to have sexual relations, thus they completely lost control over their most personal and intimate decisions, and over their basic bodily functions.221 167. Based on the foregoing, the Court finds that the rape to which the women in the village of El Mozote were subjected while under the control of military agents, constituted a violation of Article 5(2) of the American Convention, as well as of Article 11(2) of the Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) of this instrument, even though the Court does not have sufficient evidence to individualized the women who were prejudiced by this violation, investigation of which corresponds to the domestic courts. 168. Lastly, as has been proved (supra paras. 89, 94, 95, 100, 107, 111, 115 and 118), soldiers stripped the victims of their possessions, set fire to their homes, destroyed and burned their crops and killed their animals, so that the operation of the Armed Forces consisted in a sequence of events that simultaneously affected a series of rights, including the right to property. Consequently, the Court concludes that the State violated Article 21(1) and 21(2) of the American Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) of this instrument, to the detriment of the victims executed in the massacres or of their next of kin. 2) The alleged human rights violations to the detriment of the survivors 169. In this section the Court will analyze the different violations suffered by the survivors of the massacres, considering the specific circumstances of the situations they endured. 170. The statements received by the Court222 consistently allow it to verify that the personal integrity of the surviving victims of the village of El Mozote, the canton of La Joya, the village of 218 Cf. Case of Fernández Ortega et al. v. Mexico, para. 129, and Case of Atala Riffo and daughters v. Chile. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of February 24, 2012. Series C No. 239, para. 162. 219 Cf. Case of Fernández Ortega et al. v. Mexico, para. 129, and Case of the Río Negro Massacres v. Guatemala, para. 133. 220 162. 221 119. Cf. Case of Fernández Ortega et al. v. Mexico, para. 129, and Case of Atala Riffo and daughters v. Chile, para. Cf. Case of Fernández Ortega et al. v. Mexico, para. 129, and Case of Rosendo Cantú et al. v. Mexico, para. 222 Cf. Statement made by María Dorila Márquez de Márquez before the Inter-American Court during the public hearing held on April 23, 2012; Statement made by María del Rosario López Sánchez before the Inter-American Court during the public hearing held on April 23, 2012; Affidavit provided by Juan Bautista Márquez Argueta on April 1, 2012 (evidence file, tome XVII, affidavits, folio 10277); Affidavit provided by Juan Antonio Pereira Vigil on April 2, 2012 (evidence file, tome XVII, affidavits, folios 10289 and 10290); Affidavit provided by Antonia Guevara Díaz on April 1, 2012 (evidence file, tome XVII, affidavits, folios 10286 and 10287); Witness statement made by Pedro Chicas Romero before the Second First Instance Court of San Francisco Gotera on November 27, 1990 (evidence file, tome III, annex 23 to the submission of the case, folios 1692 to 1693); Witness statement made by Hilario Sánchez Gómez before the Second First Instance Court of San Francisco Gotera on November 28, 1990 (evidence file, tome III, annex 23 to the submission of the case, folios 1695 to 1697); Witness statement made by María Teófila Pereira Argueta before the Second First Instance Court of San Francisco Gotera on January 23, 1991 (evidence file, tome III, annex 23 to the submission of the case, folios 1701 to 1702); Witness statement made by María Amanda Martínez before the Second First Instance Court of San Francisco Gotera on January 23, 1991 (evidence file, tome III, annex 23 to the submission of the case, folios 1704 to 1705); Witness statement made by Bernardino Guevara Chicas before the Second First Instance Court of San Francisco Gotera on January 23, 1991 (evidence file, tome III, annex 23 to the submission of the case, folios 1706 to 1707); Witness statement made by Lucila Romero Martínez before the Second First Instance Court of San Francisco Gotera on January 24, 1991 (evidence file, tome III, annex 23 to the submission of the case, folios 1711 to 1712); Witness statement made by Eustaquio Martínez Vigil before the Second First Instance Court of San Francisco Gotera on March 20, 1991 (evidence file, tome III, annex 23 to the submission of the case, folios 1757 to 1759); Witness statement made by Genaro Sánchez before the Second First Instance Court of San Francisco Gotera on April 10, 1991 (evidence file, tome III, annex 23 to the submission of the case, folios 1767 to 1769); Witness statement made by 53