80. As established in this judgment, following the massacre in the village of Los Josefinos on April 28 and 29, 1982, the members of this community were obliged to flee from their lands. Some of them fled the village and took refuge in other villages 125 and even abroad.126 During the public hearing held before the Court, expert witness Paula Worby described how, in the context of the Guatemalan conflict, there were two categories of people who fled from the village of Los Josefinos. On the one hand, there were the group of people described as the refugee population, most of whom went into exile in Mexico between 1981 and 1983; on the other, were those displaced internally. In this regard, the expert witness mentioned two sub-categories: one, “those displaced in the hills” and, the other, the “dispersed” internally displaced. The former refers to those who hid from the army “in the hills or forests, in the region from which they were displaced.” She indicated that, “in this category, most of them returned to populated areas within a matter of days, weeks or months, but there were places where they ended up grouping together and surviving for years – up to 15 years in some cases.” The expert witness also indicated that most of those displaced by the Los Josefinos conflict ended up being internally displaced scattered around the country.127 81. The Court notes that, in Guatemala, the persecution of the civilian population continued for years, especially in the areas where the conflict was most intense, such as in the municipality of La Libertad, Petén, where the village of Los Josefinos was located. 128 In this regard, expert witness Paula Worby indicated that this persecution took place during the years of the armed conflict when “the authorities at every level fostered suspicions regarding the victims of the conflict, or even branded them directly as members of subversive groups.”129 The Court also notes that this situation continued after 1987 and, in particular, after March 9, 1987, the date on which Guatemala accepted the Court’s contentious jurisdiction. In this regard, expert witness Paula Worby indicated that, as of that date, the area continued to be a militarized zone and an area of conflict and that, according to interviews that she had conducted, some of the people had approached the village and verified that it was unsafe,130 and therefore did not return. It should also be stressed that some testimonial statements indicated that fear of reprisals by the Army was one of the reasons that people did not return to the village,131 particularly when the perpetrators of the massacre were free and continued to be present in the areas surrounding Los Josefinos. In this regard, the Court considers that the current situation of absolute impunity also means that the necessary conditions to guarantee a safe return are not in place. To this should be added that the representatives and the Commission have argued that the State has failed to take measures to guarantee the victims’ return to their place of origin following their displacement, either before or after the State accepted the Court’s contentious jurisdiction. This was also corroborated by expert witness Paula Worby who indicated that, regarding the State, “in Espinoza et al. v. Mexico, supra, para. 165. 125 Cf. Testimony of Francisco Gámez Ávila, January 1996 (evidence file, folio 16). 126 Cf. Notarized statement by Antonio Ajanel Ortiz of July 9, 2003 (evidence file, folio 12). 127 Cf. Expert opinion provided to the Court by Paula Worby during the public hearing held in this case. 128 Cf. CEH, Guatemala: Memory of Silence, June 1999, Chapter II, para. 3041 (evidence file, folio 13730). 129 Cf. Expert opinion provided to the Court by Paula Worby during the public hearing held in this case. Cf. Expert opinion provided to the Court by Paula Worby during the public hearing held in this case. The expert witness stated the following: 130 […] knowing this area of the country, which was the municipality of La Libertad at the time – that I got to know in 1988 – and it continued to be a highly militarized area at the time you mention, 1987; it was still a conflictive area; roadblocks were set up; it was very difficult to move about there. And when I think about it, at the time people did not have mobile phones, there was no internet, they did not have the resources to travel or to keep in contact with their family members, they did not even have information; but some of those interviewed also suggested that they went to see or approached and realized that it was not safe. Cf. Statements of María Luisa Mejía on January 25, 2007 (evidence file, folios 6029 and ff.), and César Armando Palencia Muralles of July 9, 2003 (evidence file, folios 8189 and ff.). 131 25