believing that she had died. After the reunion, Rolando never acknowledged her as his mother. The Commission also indicated that Carmelino Ajanel Ramos was separated from his father for 20 years, because the latter thought that he had been killed in the massacre when he was just five years old. 66. The representatives agreed with the Commission and asked the Court to declare the violation of Articles 11(2), 17 and 19 of the Convention. 67. The State did not submit specific arguments in this regard. B. Considerations of the Court b.1 The forced disappearances 68. In its consistent case law starting in 1988,100 the Court has established that the forced disappearance of persons is a multiple and continuous violation of many human rights;101 moreover, it is constituted by three concurring elements: (a) deprivation of liberty; (b) the direct intervention of state agents or their acquiescence, and (c) the refusal to acknowledge the detention and to reveal the fate or the whereabouts of the person concerned. 69. The Court has reiterated the permanent nature of the acts that constitute forced disappearance while the victims’ whereabouts remain unknown or until their remains are found, and the multiple violations it entails of the rights recognized in the American Convention, so that States have the correlative duty to investigate such acts and, eventually, punish those responsible, 102 pursuant to the obligations derived from that Convention and, in particular, from the ICFDP.103 The characterization of forced disappearance as a permanent and multiple violation of human rights104 is consistent with the standards of the European Court of Human Rights, 105 and the decisions of international bodies.106 Cf. Case of Velásquez Rodríguez v. Honduras. Merits. Judgment of July 29, 1988. Series C No. 4, para. 155, and Case of Tenorio Roca et al. v. Peru. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of June 22, 2016. Series C No. 314, para. 141. 100 Cf., inter alia, Case of Velásquez Rodríguez v. Honduras. Merits, supra, paras. 155 to 157, and Case of Alvarado Espinoza et al. v. Mexico. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 28, 2018. Series C No. 370, para. 163. 101 Cf., inter alia, Case of Velásquez Rodríguez v. Honduras. Merits, supra, paras. 155 to 157, and Case of Alvarado Espinoza et al. v. Mexico, supra, para. 165. 102 103 Article I of the ICFDP: The States Parties to this Convention undertake: (a) Not to practice, permit, or tolerate the forced disappearance of persons, even in states of emergency or suspension of individual guarantees; (b) To punish, within their jurisdictions, those persons who commit or attempt to commit the crime of forced disappearance of persons and their accomplices and accessories; (c) To cooperate with one another in helping to prevent, punish, and eliminate the forced disappearance of persons; (d) To take legislative, administrative, judicial and any other measures necessary to comply with the commitments undertaken in this Convention. That characterization is derived not only from the definition in Article III of the ICFDP, but also from different international instruments. See, Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in its Resolution 47/133 of December 18, 1992, articles 1, 4 and 17, and International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on December 20, 2006, Articles 2 and 8. 104 Cf. ECHR, Case of Kurt v. Turkey, No. 15/1997/799/1002. Judgment of May 25, 1998, para. 124; Case of Cyprus v. Turkey [GS], No. 25781/94. Judgment of May 10, 2001, paras. 132 to 134 and 147; Case of Varnava and Others v. Turkey [GS], No. 16064/90, 16065/90, 16066/90, 16068/90, 16069/90, 16070/90, 16071/90, 16072/90 and 16073/90. Judgment of September 18, 2009, paras. 111 to 113, 117, 118, 133, 138 and 145; Case of El-Masri v. The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia [GS], No. 39630/09. Judgment of December 13, 2012, paras. 240 and 241, and Case of Aslakhanova and Others v. Russia, No. 2944/06, 8300/07, 50184/07, 332/08 and 42509/10. Judgment of December 18, 2012, para. 122, 131 and 132. 105 106 Cf. Human Rights Commission, Report of the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances. General 21