Many of the next of kin, regardless of the number of years that have gone by, […] continue to look for their deceased victims in the clandestine cemeteries and […] this does not give […] peace of mind, [or…] happiness, and therefore [they…] need to close this mourning process. In other words, for many of them, it is still an open wound; it continues to be an active grieving process as a result of not having been able to perform that rite with our deceased in order to give them an honorable burial […]. Since the exhumations started in the clandestine cemeteries, it has been the victims who have assumed most of them, rather than the State, because the State has never considered them a priority or offered support for […] these exhumations. This has placed […] a considerable emotional burden on the family life because, with each cemetery that is exhumed and with each cemetery that is closed again, the search cycle is closed again. In other words, when the family [of the] victims of […] the massacres find a loved one and bury him or her, the cycle of searching and grief ends […]. 157. In this case, even though there have been some exhumations of remains that presumably belong to members of the community of Río Negro, only a very few people have been identified (infra para. 220). In addition, in this Judgment, it has been established that 17 individuals were forcibly disappeared (supra para. 127). Therefore, it is evident that the next of kin of these people have not been able to bury them or perform the funeral rites according to their religious beliefs. 158. Furthermore, during the public hearing, expert witness Rosalina Tuyuc also indicated that the Mayan cemeteries are considered sacred ground. Thus, she stated that: […] the remains of all the family, friends and acquaintances are deposited there […]. [H]owever, many of the victims of the armed conflict do not have this; in other words, they were left on the streets or they were buried elsewhere; thus the need to find those who have disappeared, those who were massacred and who are in clandestine cemeteries, so that they can be taken to that sacred place where the victims […] can take flowers, food, celebrate rites […]. [F]or many years that has not been possible for the families who are searching for their loved ones who have disappeared. 159. In addition, expert witness, Alfredo Itzep Manuel emphasized that “the actual Maya Achí people of Río Negro have more ties with the sites of Los Encuentros, Pachelaj, Los Mojones and Cerro Choquián […].”246 However, for them, the construction of the Chixoy hydroelectric plant “signified the closing or blocking off of the water, which means the closure of life itself.”247 In this regard, he indicated that the members of the community of Río Negro who survived the massacres lost contact with their sacred grounds, because many of these sacred sites for the actual Maya Achí, including Los Encuentros, were flooded owing to the construction of the Chixoy hydroelectric plant. This is one of the places they went to celebrate their rituals.248 52. Therefore, on the one hand, the Court observes that, nowadays, the members of the community of Río Negro cannot celebrate their funeral rites because the State has not found or identified most of the remains of those supposedly executed during the massacres, and that 17 people remain forcibly disappeared. But, on the other hand, they cannot perform any other type of rites, because the sacred locations they used to visit have been flooded owing to the construction of the Chixoy hydroelectric plant. This Court has already indicated that the special relationship of the indigenous peoples with their ancestral lands is not merely because they constitute their main means of subsistence, but also because they are an integral part of their cosmovision, religious beliefs and, consequently, their cultural 246 Expert opinion provided by Alfredo Itzep Manuel by affidavit (merits file, tome II, folio 1036). 247 Expert opinion provided by Alfredo Itzep Manuel by affidavit (merits file, tome II, folio 1044). 248 Cf. Expert opinion provided by Alfredo Itzep Manuel by affidavit (merits file, tome II, folios 1040, 1048, 1049 and 1052). 62