241. The State partially acknowledged the violation of Article 5 of the Convention to the detriment of the survivors of the Río Negro Community; in other words, only with regard to acts that occurred after the recognition of the Court’s jurisdiction. It has been established in this Judgment that, even though the State has carried out some investigations and has prosecuted and punished some of those responsible for the facts of the instant case, the facts continue in impunity, particularly as regards the massacres in the chapel and at Los Encuentros, and the forced disappearance of 17 individuals at the last site, regarding whom no investigation whatsoever has been conducted (supra para. 88). 242. In this regard, this Court observes that the surviving victims of the massacres of Río Negro have expressed their anguish owing to the impunity of these acts. Thus, María Osorio Chen declared that: “The people who ordered the slaughter are still free; for example, Colonel Solares has not been captured […]. Those who are now suffering are the peasants, and those who are really responsible for the massacre have not been brought before the courts; in the State of Guatemala there is no support to ensure that justice is done. I want justice to be done, for the Colonel to be captured, and not only him, but also the people from the Army. No one from the Army has been captured for the massacres; they are free, only the peasants are captured; [I dream] that this man will one day be in prison and that he will pay for all the harm that […] he caused to the people who have lost their family members.”317 243. In addition, as already mentioned in this Judgment (supra para. 205), María Eustaquia Uscap Ivoy testified that she hoped that justice is done, so that the whole truth about what happened is known and because, when people realize that there is justice, acts such as these will not happen again. 244. Thus, it is clear that the surviving victims of the massacres of Río Negro experience profound suffering and anguish as a result of the impunity of the facts, which occurred in the context of a State “scorched earth” policy aimed at the total destruction of the said community (supra para. 57). Therefore, the Court considers that the State violated Article 5(1) of the American Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) of this instrument, to the detriment of the survivors of the Río Negro massacres. The names of these persons can be found in Annex VI of this Judgment. XIV REPARATIONS (Application of Article 63(1) of the American Convention) 245. Based on the provisions of Article 63(1) of the Convention, the Court has established that any violation of an international obligation that has caused damage entails the obligation to repair it adequately,318 and that this provision reflects a customary norm that constitutes one of the fundamental principles of contemporary international law on the State responsibility.319 317 Testimony provided by affidavit by María Osorio Chen on June 15, 2012 (merits file, tome II, folio 1000). 318 Cf. Case of Velásquez Rodríguez v. Honduras. Reparations and costs. Judgment of July 21, 1989. Series C No. 7, para. 25, and Case of the Kichwa Indigenous People of Sarayaku v. Ecuador, supra, para. 279. 319 Cf. Case of Garrido and Baigorria v. Argentina. Reparations and costs. Judgment of August 27, 1998. Series C No. 39, para. 40, and Case of the Kichwa Indigenous People of Sarayaku v. Ecuador, supra, para. 279. 85