III. FINDINGS OF FACT A. Context 13. As the Commission and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (hereinafter “Inter-American Court” or “Court) have consistently stated based on reports from the Commission for Historical Clarification (CEH)4 and the Human Rights Office of the Archdiocese of Guatemala (ODHAG),5 it is a proven fact that there was an internal armed conflict in Guatemala from 1962 to 1996, which had enormous human, material, institutional, and moral costs and resulted in the murder and disappearance of over 200,000 people.6 14. Both organs of the system have consistently found that during the internal armed conflict, the state applied the so-called "National Security Doctrine," which increased the involvement of military forces in confronting "subversion." 7 In pursuit of that doctrine, State forces and related paramilitary groups were responsible for 93% of the human rights violations recorded during the armed conflict, including 92% of arbitrary executions and 91% of forced disappearances.8 Furthermore, in April 1982, the Governing Military Junta, which was presided over by José Efraín Ríos Montt and had been in power since March 23, 1982, unveiled the “National Plan for Security and Development”, establishing national objectives in military, administrative, legal, social, economic, and political terms, as well as identifying the main areas of conflict.9 In practice, the enemy within to be combated was any person or organization that represented any sort of opposition to the State.10 Although that concept initially referred to guerrilla organizations, it gradually expanded to include all “those who, for whatever reason, were not in favor of the established regime,” 11 including “anyone, who genuinely or allegedly supported the fight to change the established order.”12 15. Particularly during the most violent period of the conflict, from 1978 to 1983, when 91 percent of the violations documented by the CEH were committed13 and, moreover, when the events in this case and other massacres in Petén occurred,14 the counterinsurgency policy implemented in Guatemala was characterized by “military actions aimed to exterminate groups and communities, as well as to forcibly displace them when it Report of the CEH, Guatemala: Memory of Silence (hereinafter “CEH, Guatemala: Memory of Silence”). Available (in Spanish) at http://www.centrodememoriahistorica.gov.co/descargas/guatemala-memoria-silencio/guatemala-memoria-del-silencio.pdf 5 ODHAG, “Guatemala Nunca Más” [Guatemala, Never Again], Report of the Interdiocesan Project “Recovery of Historical Memory,” Available (in Spanish) at http://www.fundacionpdh.org/lesahumanidad/informes/guatemala/informeREMHI-Tomo1.htm. 6 See, inter alia, IACHR, Report No. 86/10, Case 12.649, Merits, Community of Rio Negro of the Maya Indigenous People and Its Members, Guatemala, July 14, 2010 (hereinafter “IACHR, Río Negro Merits Report”), par. 50; IACHR, Report No. 6/14, Case 12.788, Merits, Members of the Village of Chichupac and Neighboring Communities of the Municipality of Rabinal, Guatemala, April 2, 2014 (hereinafter “IACHR, Chichupac Merits Report”), par. 36-37; I/A Court H.R., Case of the “Las Dos Erres” Massacre v. Guatemala, Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations and Costs, Judgment of Tuesday, November 24, 2009, Series C No. 211 (hereinafter “I/A Court H.R., Las Dos Erres Massacre Judgment”), par. 70; I/A Court H.R., Case of the Río Negro Massacres v. Guatemala, Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations and Costs, Judgment of September 4, 2012, Series C. No. 250 (hereinafter “I/A Court H.R., Río Negro Massacres Judgment”), par. 56; I/A Court H.R., Case of the Plan de Sánchez Massacre v. Guatemala, Merits, Judgment of April 29, 2004, Series C. No. 105 (hereinafter “I/A Court H.R., Plan de Sánchez Massacre Judgment”), par. 42.1; I/A Court H.R., Case of Tiu Tojín v. Guatemala, Merits, Reparations and Costs, Judgment of November 26, 2008, Series C. No. 190 (hereinafter “I/A Court H.R., Tiu Tojín Judgment”), par. 48; I/A Court H.R., Case of Chitay Nech et al. v. Guatemala, Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs, Judgment of May 25, 2010, Series C. No. 212 (hereinafter “I/A Court H.R., Chitay Nech Judgment”), par. 64; and I/A Court H.R., Case of García and Family v. Guatemala, Merits, Reparations and Costs, Judgment of November 29, 2012, Series C No. 258 (hereinafter “I/A Court H.R., García and Family Judgment”), par. 51. 7 IACHR, Río Negro Merits Report, par. 52; IACHR, Cichupac Merits Report, par. 38; I/A Court H.R., Las Dos Erres Massacre Judgment, par. 71; I/A Court H.R., Río Negro Massacres Judgment, par. 57; I/A Court H.R., Plan de Sánchez Massacre Judgment, par. 42.2; I/A Court H.R., Chitay Nech Judgment, par. 64. 8 IACHR, Río Negro Merits Report, par. 52; IACHR, Cichupac Merits Report, par. 38; I/A Court H.R., Río Negro Massacres Judgment, par. 56; I/A Court H.R., Plan de Sánchez Massacre Judgment, par. 42.4; and I/A Court H.R., Chitay Nech Judgment, par. 64. 9 IACHR, Río Negro Merits Report, par. 55-56; IACHR, Cichupac Merits Report, par. 40-41; I/A Court H.R., Las Dos Erres Massacre Judgment, par. 72; I/A Court H.R., Río Negro Massacres Judgment, Footnote 38; and I/A Court H.R., Plan de Sánchez Massacre Judgment, par. 42.2. 10 IACHR, Río Negro Merits Report, par. 52; IACHR, Cichupac Merits Report, par. 38; I/A Court H.R., Las Dos Erres Massacre Judgment, par. 71; I/A Court H.R., Río Negro Massacres Judgment, par. 57; I/A Court H.R., Plan de Sánchez Massacre Judgment, par. 42.2; I/A Court H.R., Chitay Nech Judgment, par. 64. 11 I/A Court H.R., García and Family Judgment, par. 51. 12 I/A Court H.R., Case of Molina Theissen v. Guatemala, Merits, Judgment of May 4, 2004, Series C. No. 106 (hereinafter “I/A Court H.R., Molina Theissen Judgment”), par. 40.2. 13 IACHR, Río Negro Merits Report, par. 53; IACHR, Cichupac Merits Report, par. 37; I/A Court H.R., Las Dos Erres Massacre Judgment, par. 71; I/A Court H.R., Río Negro Massacres Judgment, par. 57; and I/A Court H.R., Chitay Nech Judgment, par. 65. 14 For example, the Las Dos Erres massacre. See I/A Court H.R., Las Dos Erres Massacre Judgment, par. 74. 4 4