separation. Furthermore, the Court considers that, from the moment of the separation in 1999, the State had the positive obligation to take measures aimed at family reunification to ensure that the child William Gelin could live with his father. In this regard, the Court notes that there is no record that the State took steps to ensure that Bersson Gelin and his son could meet again from 1999 until March 2002 when Mr. Gelin obtained a safeconduct. However, in its arguments, the State affirmed that the representatives had supposedly indicated that Bersson Gelin had been reunited with his son and currently lived in the Dominican Republic (supra para. 412). The Court considers that this does not change the unjustified nature of the separation and the absence of measures taken by the State to facilitate family reunification between 1999 and 2002. 473 Based on the foregoing, the Court finds that the State violated the right to protection of the family, recognized in Article 17(1) of the Convention, in relation to failure to comply with the obligation to respect rights without discrimination established in Article 1(1) of the Convention, to the detriment of Bersson Gelin and William Gelin, and also in relation to the rights of the child, recognized in Article 19 of this instrument, to the detriment of the child, William Gelin. 419. Regarding the separation of the Sensión family, the Court recalls that, in 1994, before the State had accepted the Court’s contentious jurisdiction, Ana Virginia Nolasco and her daughters Ana Lidia Sensión and Reyita Antonia Sensión were detained and expelled to Haiti, while the girls’ father, Antonio Sensión, was working in Puerto Plata. Mr. Sensión found out about the expulsion of his wife and daughters when he returned home and began his search, which lasted eight years, until 2002, when he found them and was reunited with them (supra para. 218). The Court reiterates that, even though it does not have competence to rule on the expulsion of Ana Virginia Nolasco and her daughters, it can rule on the State’s obligation to adopt measures aimed a reuniting the members of the Sensión family from the time of the State’s acceptance of the Court’s jurisdiction on March 25, 1999. In this regard, the State argued that, on the one hand, Virginia Nolasco and the girls Ana Lidia and Reyita Antonia, both surnamed Sensión, were already living apart from Mr. Sensión before their expulsion because he worked in Puerto Plata, and that Mr. Sensión only became aware of the expulsion of his family three months later. On the other hand, the State asserted that, “only three years” had passed between the time it accepted the Court’s jurisdiction in 1999 and 2002 when it proceeded to grant safeconducts to the members of the Sensión family (supra para. 412). The Court considers that the fact that Antonio Sensión worked in another place and did not live with his family permanently does not mean that the Sensión family did not have a family life before the expulsion. Furthermore, the State’s assertion reaffirms that, from 1999 to 2002, it took no measures aimed at facilitating the reunification of the members of the Sensión family. 420. Consequently, the State failed to comply with its obligation to take measures aimed at reuniting the members of the Sensión family, the Court considers that the State violated its obligations relating to the right to protection of the family recognized in Article 17(1) of the Convention, in relation to non-compliance with its obligations established in Article 1(1) of the Convention, to the detriment of Antonio Sensión, Ana Virginia Nolasco, Ana Lidia Sensión and Reyita Antonia Sensión, and also in relation to the rights of the child, protected in Article 19 of this treaty, to the detriment of children at the time, Ana Lidia Sensión and Reyita Antonia Sensión. 421. According to the facts, Jeanty Fils-Aimé was detained separately from Janise Midi, Diane Fils-Aimé, Antonio Fils-Aimé and Endry Fils-Aimé (supra para. 210). However, the Court does not have sufficient probative elements to determine with certainty the exact 473 However, it should be noted that although Mr. Gelin has been able to visit his son several times, to date permanent family reunification has not been achieved, because, according to the statements of Bersson Gelin, he continues to live in Haiti for fear of being expelled again. 134