B. Rights to personal integrity, personal freedom, privacy, protection of the family, and rights of the child (Articles 5.1, 5.255 7.1, 7.2, 7.356, 11.257, 17.158, 19,59 and 22.160 of the American Convention, in conjunction with Article 1.1 thereof). 56. The Commission notes the allegations of the petitioners about the raids, acts of violence illegal and arbitrary arrests and interventions, harassment and threats against Herminio Deras and his family committed by State agents prior to his death, between 1977 and 1982. The petitioners reported that they had identified members of the Third Infantry Battalion and DNI agents as the persons who committed the aforementioned acts. They added that they had filed complaints about those acts but that but that no investigations had been carried out. The IACHR notes that it lacks documentation in that regard. That notwithstanding, the State did not contest the petitioners' allegations. Nor did it provide information regarding the start of any investigations into them. 57. The Commission further notes that, according to the petitioners and the statement made by Mr. Deras' sister Irma, in June 1984, after Mr. Deras' death, military personnel raided and illegally and arbitrarily arrested several of his next-of-kin. Reportedly, those persons had been put in DNI cells where they were beaten, threatened, and interrogated regarding their alleged membership of guerrilla groups. Again, the State did not contest the allegations of the petitioners. 58. In the Commission's opinion, the allegations made by the petitioners and not contested by the State form part of the aforementioned "national security doctrine" context. The IACHR notes that, based on the information furnished by the petitioners regarding the details of each of these episodes, it is possible to determine that they are connected with the participation by Mr. Deras and some of his relatives in trade union and political organizations identified by the government of the day as participants in, or sympathizers, of Salvadoran guerrillas. 59. Given that the allegations of the petitioners, that the State has not contested, entail various violations of rights upheld in the American Convention, the Commission shall proceed to take a stand on each of them 60. As regards the right to personal integrity, Article 5.1 of the American Convention upholds, in broad terms, the right to physical, psychological, and moral integrity. For its part, Article 5.2 establishes, more specifically, an absolute prohibition against subjecting anyone to torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading punishment or treatment, as well as the right of anyone deprived of liberty to be treated with respect for the inherent dignity of the human person. The Inter-American Court has held that any violation Article 5.2 of the Convention necessarily entails violation of Article 5.1 thereof.61 Article 5.1. Every person has the right to have his physical, mental, and moral integrity respected. Article 5.2. No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman, or degrading punishment or treatment (...). 56 Article 7.1. Every person has the right to personal liberty and security. Article 7.2. No one shall be deprived of his physical liberty except for the reasons and under the conditions established beforehand by the constitution of the State Party concerned or by a law established pursuant thereto. Article 7.3. No one shall be subject to arbitrary arrest or imprisonment. 57 Article 11.1. Everyone has the right to have his honor respected and his dignity recognized; 2. Article 11.2. No one may be the object of arbitrary or abusive interference with his private life, his family, or his correspondence, or of unlawful attacks on his honor or reputation. 58 Article 17.1. The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the state. 59 Article 19. Every minor child has the right to the measures of protection required by his condition as a minor on the part of his family, society, and the state. 60 Article 22.1. Every person lawfully in the territory of a State Party has the right to move about in it, and to reside in it subject to the provisions of the law. 61 I/A Court H.R. Case of Quispialaya Vilcapoma v. Peru. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of November 23, 2015. Series C No. 308, par. 125. 55 11