64 reproduction capacity may constitute a violation of the rights recognized in the American Convention, as described previously. That said, in this case, a dispute exists about the appropriate terminology to be used. On the one hand, both the Commission and the representative classify the facts of this case as forced sterilization, while the State argued that this term belonged to international criminal law, so that, in this case, the Court should eventually refer to non-consensual or involuntary sterilization. The Court notes that, in the sphere of human rights, different wording has been used by regional and international human rights agencies. Thus, references has been made to nonconsensual sterilization,266 forced or non-consensual sterilization,267 involuntary sterilization,268 compulsory sterilization,269 forced sterilization,270 “esterilización forzosa” [“forced sterilization” in English],271 and coerced sterilization.272 For the purposes of this judgment, the Court will consider sterilization without prior, free, full and informed consent as non-consensual or involuntary sterilization. 205. Accordingly, the Court must verify whether Bolivia complied with its obligation to respect and ensure, without discrimination, the rights to personal integrity, to personal liberty, to dignity, to private and family life, to raise a family and of access to information, in relation to personal autonomy and sexual and reproductive health, by prior, free, full and informed consent. Together with the foregoing, the Court must determine to what extent the facts of this case constituted an act of violence against women. Cf. UN, Committee for the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, General Recommendation No. 24, Women and health, 1999, para. 22; UN, Committee for the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, A.S. against Hungary (Communication No. 4/2004), CEDAW/C/36/D/4/2004, August 29, 2006, para. 11.3; UN, Report of the Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, Anand Grover, A/64/272, August 10, 2009, para. 55, and ECHR, Case of V.C. v. Slovakia, No. 18968/07. Judgment of November 8, 2011; Case of N.B. v. Slovakia, No. 29518/10. Judgment of June 12, 2012, and Case of I.G., M.K. and R.H. v. Slovakia, No. 15966/04. Judgment of November 13, 2012 (evidence file, volume VIII, annexes 26, 27 and 28 to the brief with motions, pleadings and evidence, folios 2474 to 2577). 266 Cf. UN, Report of the Special Rapporteur on the right of everyone to the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health, Anand Grover, A/64/272, August 10, 2009, para. 55. 267 Cf. Committee against Torture, Conclusions and recommendations with regard to Peru, CAT/C/PER/CO/4, July 25, 2006, para. 23, and Committee against Torture, Concluding observations with regard to Slovakia, CAT/C/SVK/CO/2, December 17, 2009, para. 14. 268 Cf. UN, Committee for the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, General Recommendation No. 19, Violence against women, 1992, para. 22, and Committee for the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, Concluding observations with regard to The Netherlands, CEDAW/C/NLD/CO/5, February 5, 2010, paras. 46 and 47. 269 Cf. UN, Human Rights Committee, Concluding observations with regard to Peru, CCPR/CO/70/PER, November 15, 2000, para. 21; UN, Committee for the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, General Recommendation No. 21, Equality in marriage and family relations, 1994, para. 22; UN, Report of the Special Rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, Manfred Nowak, A/HRC/7/3, January 15, 2008, para. 39; Human Rights Committee, Concluding observations with regard to Slovakia, CCPR/CO/78/SVK, August 22, 2003, para. 12; Human Rights Committee, Concluding observations with regard to Slovakia, CCPR/C/SVK/CO/3, April 20, 2011, para. 13; Committee on the rights of persons with disabilities, Concluding observations with regard to Peru, CRPD/C/PER/CO/1, May 16, 2012, para. 35, and Committee against Torture, Concluding observations on the second periodic report of Kenya, CAT/C/KEN/CO/2, June 19, 2013, para. 27. 270 Cf. UN, Report of the Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences, Ms. Radhika Coomaraswamy, Policies and practices that impact women’s reproductive rights and contribute to, cause or constitute violence against women, E/CN.4/1999/68/Add.4, January 21, 1999, para. 51; Human Rights Committee, Concluding observations with regard to Japan, CCPR/C/79/Add.102, November 19, 1998, para. 31; Report of the Special Rapporteur on violence against women, its causes and consequences, Rashida Manjoo, Violence against women with disabilities, A/67/227, August 3, 2012, para. 28. 271 Cf. UN, Human Rights Committee, Concluding observations with regard to Slovakia, CCPR/CO/78/SVK, August 22, 2003, para. 12, and Committee against Torture, Concluding observations with regard to Kenya, CAT/C/KEN/CO/2, June 19, 2013, para. 27; Human Rights Committee, Concluding observations with regard to Slovakia, CCPR/CO/78/SVK, August 22, 2003, para. 12, and Committee for the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, Concluding observations with regard to Slovakia, CEDAW/C/SVK/CO/4, July 17, 2008, para. 31. 272