greatly affected their cultural identity references. In particular, the professional life project of Mr. Fleury’s wife was frustrated. 89. Based on all the above, this Court declares that the State is responsible for the violation of the right to personal integrity, in the terms of Article 5(1) of the American Convention, to the detriment of Mr. Fleury’s wife Rose Benoit Fleury, their daughters Rose M. and Flemingkov Fleury and their son Heulingher Fleury. VII.4 RIGHT TO FREEDOM OF MOVEMENT AND RESIDENCE A. Arguments 90. The representatives argued that the threats, harassment and attacks against human rights defenders that oblige them to abandon their country of residence constitute “an indirect violation” of their freedom of movement and residence, a right protected in the Haitian Constitution76 and in the American Convention.77 They indicated that, in this case, Mr. Fleury and his family were forced to abandon their home, their neighborhood, and their country, owing to the State’s inability to comply with its obligation to provide them with the necessary conditions of security to confront the threats and harassment of which they were victims, which would have allowed them freedom of movement and residence on Haitian territory. In addition, Mr. Fleury was not able enjoy freedom of movement within his own country, had to live in hiding for five years, was forced to move constantly, and to leave his home and his family for fear of reprisals by State agents. 91. In addition, although they did not ask the Court to declare a violation of the right recognized in Article 17 of the American Convention,78 the representatives stated that the forced displacement also caused serious problems within the family and that it had the same and perhaps even greater impact on the rest of the family, especially on the young children. They also argued that children who experience a rupture in the social ties that unite them with their family are particularly vulnerable to subsequent emotional problems. 92. Even though the Commission did not allege the violation of this right, it did refer in its application to the facts mentioned by the representatives. B. Considerations of the Court 93. On previous occasions, the Court has established that the right to freedom of movement and residence recognized in Article 22(1) of the Convention is an essential 76 Article 41 of the Constitution of Haiti. 77 Article 22(1) of the American Convention on Human Rights establishes that: 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. 78 Article 17(1) of the American Convention on Human Rights establishes that: The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the state. 25