always be “a minimum level of certainty regarding the existence of said individuals.”33 In addition, the Court has stated that the identification of alleged victims “[does] not necessarily have to be through birth or death certificates, and that there could be other elements or documents that, in the context, could be reasonable and acceptable.”34 25. Taking into account the full recognition of international responsibility on the part of the State in relation to the events and, moreover, that the State did not object to the evidence put forward by the petitioners, the Commission considers that evidence sufficient to prove the existence and identity of the alleged victims in this case. The foregoing notwithstanding, bearing in mind other evidence in the record, such as the reparation payments made, the Commission considers it necessary to add two children not included by the petitioners to the list of direct victims of the massacre.35 Moreover, the Commission underscores that in a case such as this, in which the obstacles and difficulties in fully identifying the victims are attributable to the State itself, such a circumstance, which Guatemala has not remedied by means of a complete clarification of the facts, should not adversely affect the victims in the international proceeding. In light of the above, and taking into account the particular characteristics of this case, the Commission is of the view that it would be appropriate to allow a degree of flexibility in the identification of the victims of the different groups of violations, as indicated in the Consolidated Annex on victim identification attached to this report. The IACHR also deems it pertinent to include in its recommendations the need for the State to ensure a mechanism for full identification of the victims in this case in the terms detailed herein below. C. Facts in the case 26. Since at least the mid-1970s—and in the time immediately prior to the events—guerrillas or rebel armed forces had been active in Petén,36 frequently entering Los Josefinos and clashing with the Army in the area, with the result that the population lived in constant fear.37 Indeed, according to CEH reports, there had been a climate of increasing tension in Petén Department since 1981. 38 Specifically in Los Josefinos, the Guatemalan Army carried out a number of assassinations and detentions of people suspected of collaborating with the guerrillas in the period immediately before the events; 39 guerrillas also assassinated two men in February 1982,40 and the village mayor himself was murdered by unknown individuals in September 1981.41 It is clear from those facts that the population of Los Josefinos lived in an atmosphere of permanent tension and fear. I/A Court H.R., Río Negro Massacres Judgment, par. 51. I/A Court H.R., Río Negro Massacres Judgment, par. 49. 35 Specifically, they are Rigoberto Hernández Arevalo and Leily Eleany Batres Cordero. 36 Annex 01. Notarized declaration of César Armando Palencia Muralles given in the presence of Edgar Fernando Pérez Archila, Notary Public, on July 9, 2003 (hereinafter “Notarized declaration of César Armando Palencia Muralles”), pp. 1-2. See also: Annex 02. Notarized declaration of Antonio Ajanel Ortiz given in the presence of Edgar Fernando Pérez Archila, Notary Public, on July 9, 2003 (hereinafter “Notarized declaration of Antonio Ajanel Ortiz”), p. 1; Annex 03. Declaration given by Francisco Gámez Ávila in January 1996 (hereinafter “Declaration of Francisco Gámez Ávila”). p. 2. 37 Annex 02. Notarized declaration of Antonio Ajanel Ortiz given in the presence of Edgar Fernando Pérez Archila, Notary Public, on July 9, 2003 (hereinafter “Notarized declaration of Antonio Ajanel Ortiz”), p. 1. 38 CEH, Guatemala: Memory of Silence, pp. 2142-2143. 39 CEH, Guatemala: Memory of Silence, p. 3193. 40 CEH, Guatemala: Memory of Silence, pp. 3142, 3164, 3174 and 3175. 41 CEH, Guatemala: Memory of Silence, p. 3186. 33 34 7