266.m The Court recalls that the State must prevent the recurrence of human rights violations such as those described in this case and, consequently, adopt all the legal, administrative and any other measures necessary to ensure the effective exercise of the rights322 of migrants, in conformity with the obligations of respect and guarantee established in Articles 1(1) and 2 of the Convention.323 a) Human rights training for public officials 267. The Commission asked the Court to order the adoption of the necessary measures to prevent the occurrence of similar events in the future, in accordance with the obligation of prevention and protection of human rights established in the American Convention. In particular, it asked that permanent human rights programs be implemented in the training establishments of the Armed Forces and the National Police, particularly with regard to the excessive use of force and the principle of non-discrimination. Similarly, the representatives asked that the State implement, within one year, training sessions on the human rights of migrants, the use of force, and the principle of non-discrimination for members of the armed and police forces, agents responsible for border control, and agents responsible for the administration of justice. 268. The State did not comment in this respect. 269. The effectiveness and impact of the implementation of the human rights education programs for public officials is crucial to generate guarantees of non-repetition of events such as those in the instant case.324 However, since the State’s international responsibility for the violation of Articles 1(1), 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 25 and 22(9) of the American Convention has been proved, this Court considers it important to enhance the institutional capacities of the bodies responsible for respecting and guaranteeing the said human rights, by training members of the Armed Forces, border control agents, and agents responsible for migratory procedures, in order to prevent the repetition of events such as those examined in this case.325 270. Within these programs, the State must refer to the Court’s case law on the matter and, especially, to the criteria established in this Judgment, including the applicable international instruments to which the Dominican Republic is a party. The training, as appropriate to each authority, should include the following topics: (a) the use of force by law enforcement agents, in accordance with the principles of legality, proportionality, necessity and exceptionality, as well as the criteria of progressive and differentiated use of force. Also, on preventive measures adopted by the State, and actions during and following an incident; (b) the principle of equality and non-discrimination applied, in particular, to migrants, and (c) due process in the detention and deportation of irregular migrants, according to the standards established in this Judgment. Additionally, in order to comply with these objectives and since this refers to a system of continuing education, the said courses must be offered permanently.326 In this regard, the State must present an annual report for three consecutive years indicating the measures it has taken to this end. 322 Cf. Case of Velásquez Rodríguez. Merits, supra, para. 166, and Case of the Kichwa Indigenous People of Sarayaku v. Ecuador, supra, para. 221. 323 Cf. Case of Pacheco Teruel et al. v. Honduras, supra, para. 92. 324 Cf. Case of the Las Dos Erres Massacre v. Guatemala supra, para. 252. 325 Cf. Case of Radilla Pacheco v. Mexico, supra, para. 346, and Case of de las The Rio Negro Massacres v. Guatemala, supra, para. 291. 326 Cf. Case of González et al. (“Cotton field”) v. Mexico, supra, para. 541, and Case of Pacheco Teruel et al. v. Honduras, supra, para. 114. 70