18 murdered or disappeared.39 However, these proceedings were not successful,40 and the crimes committed during that period were never resolved.41 B. Forced disappearance as a multiple and continuing human rights violation and the duties of respect and guarantee 57. The phenomenon of forced disappearances of persons requires a systematic and comprehensive analysis; for that reason, this Tribunal considers it appropriate to reiterate the legal grounds that substantiate the need for a comprehensive perspective of forced disappearance due to the plurality of behaviors that, as long as they go on, joined together for a single purpose, permanently violate legal interests protected by the Convention.42 58. The Court notes that the attention given by the international community to the phenomenon of forced disappearance of persons is not recent. The United Nations Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances developed, in the 1980s, a functional definition of the phenomenon, emphasizing the illegal detention of persons by government agents or government agencies or private organized groups acting on behalf of the State or with its authorization, support, or acquiescence.43 59. In international law, this Tribunals’ jurisprudence has been a precursor to the consolidation of a comprehensive perspective of the gravity and the continuous or permanent and autonomous nature of the figure of forced disappearance of persons, in which the act of disappearance and its execution begin with a person’s deprivation of freedom and the subsequent lack of information on that person’s whereabouts and continues until the whereabouts of the disappeared person are known and his or her identity is established. Based on the foregoing, the Court has reiterated that the forced disappearance of persons constitutes a multiple violation of several rights protected by the American Convention and places the victim in a state of complete defenselessness, giving 39 Cf. Sections of the impeachment trial against Hugo Banzer Suárez (case file of appendixes to the application, appendix 20, folios 1802 to 1804, and case file of appendixes to the brief of pleadings and motions, PD-24, folios 1698 to 1700). 40 Cf. Barcelona International Studies and Documentation Center (CIDOB). Biography of Hugo Banzer Suárez (case file of appendixes to the application, appendix 3, folio 1555), available at: http://www.cidob.org/es/documentacion/biografias_lideres_politicos/america_del_sur/bolivia/hugo_banzer_suar ez (last visit: August 2, 2010) and declaration of expert witness Waldo Albarracín Sánchez rendered at the public hearing held on April 13, 2010 in Lima, Peru. 41 Cf. Declaration rendered during the public hearing (supra para. 8) by expert witness Waldo Albarracín Sánchez; Press release published on December 28, 2001 at BBCmundo.com, “Banzer: Bolivia will analize extradition” (case file of appendixes to the application, appendix 29, folios 2460 to 2461) available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/spanish/latin_america/newsid_1731000/1731160.stm (last visit: August, 2010); Press release published on January 9, 2002 at El País, “Extradition: Tuto leaves Banzer in hands of the Supreme Court” (case file of appendixes to the application, appendix 29, folio 2462), and Press release published on January 13, 2002 at La Prensa, “Tyrannies in Latin America” (case file of appendixes to the brief of pleadings and motions, PD-150, folio 2513). 42 43 Cf. Case of Radilla Pacheco v. Mexico, supra note 8, para. 138. Cf. Case of Chitay Nech et al. v. Guatemala, supra note 6, para. 82. See also, Human Rights Commission. Working Group Report on Forced or Involuntary Disappearance of Persons, Report on the visit made to Sri Lanka by three members of the Working Group, October 7 to 18, 1991. E/CN.4/1992/18/Add. 1 on January 5, 1992.