37 caused damage to her physical and psychological suffering, and contributed to her feelings of serious anguish, desperation, and fear she experienced by living with her daughter in a clandestine detention center, where one normally could hear the torture inflicted on the other prisoners in SID111 and not knowing the fate of her daughter when they were separated, 112 as well as being unable to foresee her final fate. All this constitutes an affectation of such magnitude that it should be qualified as the most serious form of violation of her psychological integrity. 99. This enforced disappearance constitutes, due to the nature of the injured rights, a violation of a jus cogens principle, especially serious because it occurred in the context of a systematic practice of “State-sponsored terrorism,” at an inter-state level. 113 100. The preparation and execution of the arrest and subsequent disappearance of María Claudia García could not have been perpetrated without the knowledge or higher orders of the military, police, and intelligence headquarters at the time, or without the collaboration, acquiescence, or tolerance, manifested in various actions, carried out in a coordinated or concatenated manner, by members of the security forces and intelligence services (and even diplomats) of the States involved, wherein State agents not only grossly failed in the obligations to prevent and protect against violations of the rights of the alleged victims, enshrined in Articles 1(1) of the American Convention, but also used the official investiture and resources provided by the State to commit the violations. 101. In consideration of the preceding, in relation with the enforced disappearance that continues to this date, the Court finds that the State is responsible for the violation of the personal liberty, to the personal integrity, to the right to juridical personality, and to life of María Claudia García Iruretagoyena de Gelman, recognized in Articles 7(1); 5(1) and 5(2); 3 and 4(1), given the failure to comply with the obligation to respect and guarantee rights, established in Article 1(1) of the American Convention, in relation with Articles I and XI of the Inter-American Convention on the Forced Disappearance of Persons.114 VI.2 RIGHT TO JURIDICAL PERSONALITY, RIGHTS OF THE CHILD, PROTECTION OF THE FAMILY, RIGHT TO A NAME, RIGHT TO NATIONALITY, AND RIGHT TO HUMANE TREATMENT [PERSONAL INTEGRITY] OF MARÍA MACARENA GELMAN GARCÍA IRURETAGOYENA, AND TO RIGHT TO HUMANE TREATMENT                                                          111 Testimony of Sara Méndez. Rendered by Juan Gelman during the public hearing. 112 Cf., mutatis mutandi, Case of del Penal Miguel Castro Castro V. Perú. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of November 25, 2006. Series C No. 160, para. 103. 113 As such, it may be classified as a crime against humanity. 114 In various cases, the Court has analyzed, or declared the violation, of the provisions mentione din the Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearance. In this regard, see the following cases: Case of Blanco Romero et al. V. Venezuela, arts. I, X and XI; Case of Heliodoro Portugal V. Panamá. arts. I and II; Case of Tiu Tojín V. Guatemala, art. I; Case of Ticona Estrada V. Bolivia, arts. I, III and XI; Case of Anzualdo Castro V. Perú, arts. I and II; Case of Radilla Pacheco V. México, arts. I and II; Case of Ibsen Cárdenas V. Bolivia, arts. I and XI; and Case of Chitay Nech et al. V. Guatemala.