88 199. The Court considers that the victims of the violation of Article 11(2) of the Convention, in relation to Article 21 thereof, are the persons indicated as victims under this article in Appendix III of this judgment. * * * 200. Based on the above, the Court finds that the State is responsible for the violation of the rights embodied in: (a) Article 21 (Right to Property) of the Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) (Obligation to Respect Rights) thereof, to the detriment of the fifty-nine (59) persons who lost their possessions in El Aro, and who are indicated in Appendix III of this judgment; and (b) Article 11(2) (Protection of Honor and Dignity) of the Convention, in relation to Articles 21 (Right to Property) and 1(1) (Obligation to Respect Rights) thereof, to the detriment of the forty-three (43) persons whose homes were destroyed in El Aro, and who are indicated in Appendix III of this judgment. XII ARTICLE 22 OF THE CONVENTION (FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT AND RESIDENCE) IN RELATION TO ARTICLE 1(1) THEREOF The Commission’s arguments 201. Regarding the alleged violation of Article 22 of the Convention, the Commission, in its final arguments brief, requested the Court to rule on this alleged violation, on “the same grounds and based on the allegations of the representatives of the [alleged] victims and their next of kin, and the precedent created on this issue by the Court’s judgment in the Mapiripán Massacre case.” The representatives’ arguments 202. Regarding the violation of Article 22 of the American Convention, the representatives argued that: (a) The State is responsible for the violation of this article owing to the internal displacement which the next of kin of the alleged victims were forced to undergo; (b) Following the facts in La Granja and El Aro, the inhabitants “were forced to abandon their homes,” like “thousands” of Colombians during the last decade; (c) “The difficulty of individualizing the victims of forced displacement, when this occurs massively, is one of the principle components of impunity in relation to this human rights violation”;