95 220. Some of these alleged 1,200 displaced persons have been identified in the proceedings before the Court. In particular, the representatives identified a total of 31 persons displaced by the events in La Granja and 671 persons displaced by the events in El Aro, for a total of 702 persons displaced in this case when they presented the useful evidence requested by the Court. 221. In this regard, the Court considers that the failure to identify all the persons who were displaced is due, in part, to the circumstances in which the massacres took place, including the fact that, in El Aro, 80% of the village was burned down, so that the identity documents of the displaced persons were also destroyed (supra para. 125(79)). This means that it is impossible to know with any certainty how many people were displaced in this case. Therefore, the Court can only assess the situation with regard to those who have been identified in the proceedings before it. Nevertheless, as previously indicated,209 the Court records its profound concern that many other people are possibly faced with this situation and have not been identified in these proceedings. 222. The Court deems it pertinent to mention that some of the displaced persons consider that they cannot return to Ituango until the State can ensure them safety and justice. Also, several of them have expressed their profound anxiety that they may suffer further attacks if they return to Ituango, which is located in an area with significant paramilitary presence (supra para. 125(26) to 125(28)). In other words, their right to personal safety is violated by the situation of displacement,210 owing to the events they have experienced and also to the fact that the State has not ensured the necessary conditions for them to return to Ituango, should they so wish. 223. Nevertheless, the Court considers it a positive factor that the State has provided help or support to some of the displaced and their next of kin: Luis Humberto Mendoza Arroyave and Julio Oliver Pérez Areiza and nine members of their families, owing to their status as displaced (supra para. 125(111)). * 224. The Court has taken various criteria into account in order to determine the victims of the violation of Article 22 of the Convention in this case. First, the alleged victims can be determined because the facts concerning the forced displacement are included in the application, in which the Commission stated that the “acts of violence designed to terrorize the population obliged the families to displace.211 In addition, in the application, the Commission transcribed testimonies and domestic judgments which refer to the “forced and massive displacement of approximately 1,200 peasants to jurisdictions of the municipalities of Ituango and Valdivia.”212 The 209 Cf. Case of the “Mapiripán Massacre”, supra note 8, para. 183. 210 Cf. Report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on the situation of human rights in Colombia, E/CN.4/2003/13, February 24, 2003, para. 94 (ap.ohchr.org/documents/alldocs.aspx?doc_id=3260). 211 Paragraph 54 of the Inter-American Commission’s application. See also paragraphs 2 and 150 of the Inter-American Commission’s application. 212 Paragraph 62 of the Inter-American Commission’s application.