declarations on measures to eliminate terrorism, namely “[c]riminal acts intended or calculated to provoke a state of terror in the general public, a group of persons or particular persons for political purposes [which] are in any circumstances unjustifiable, whatever the considerations of a political, philosophical, ideological, racial, ethnic, religious or any other nature that may be used to justify them.” These and other authorities suggest that characteristics common to incidents of terrorism may be described in terms of: (a) the nature and identity of the perpetrators of terrorism; (b) the nature and identity of the victims of terrorism; (c) the objectives of terrorism; and (d) the means employed to perpetrate terror violence 106. The Commission indicated that terrorist violence can take many forms and vary according to contexts of peace or armed conflict. Likewise, it highlighted that the behavior of actors other than States, including terrorists and terrorist groups, has implications for the evaluation of the obligations of the States regarding the protection of human rights in the continent”68. 107. Specifically, in relation to the international responsibility of States for the occurrence of terrorist acts in their jurisdiction, the Commission indicated that, within the framework of its obligations regarding the right to life, ˝cannot be interpreted in a way that puts State in a situation of guarantor regarding any terrorist threat, as this would impose a disproportionate burden on the authorities. However, in certain established circumstances, public officials may be subject to a positive obligation to take operational measures to prevent a terrorist act from occurring”69. 108. Specifically, regarding the duty of prevention, the Commission observes that in order to determine when the State is responsible for the absence of prevention, the Report of the UN Special Rapporteur presents the following analysis methodology: “(i) the authorities knew or ought to have known of (ii) the existence, at the relevant time, of a real and immediate (iii) risk to the life of an identified individual or group of individuals within its jurisdiction due to (iv) criminal acts of a third party, and that they failed to (v) take measures within the scope of their legal powers and available resources, and in conformity with their international obligations which, judged objectively and reasonably, might have been expected to avoid that risk” 70. The Rapporteur emphasized that “States are required to establish effective mechanisms for identifying potential future threats of terrorist attack, to analyze the information with reasonable care, to reach an informed risk assessment and to take appropriate action”71. He added that the activities of intelligence organizations must be fully compliant with international human rights law. Likewise, within the framework of the duty of prevention and about the real danger, it stated that “[p]urely ex post facto assessments cannot be the sole basis for a finding of State responsibility for a violation of the right to life72. 1. Specific facts related to the prevention of the attack 109. On March 17, 1992, approximately two years before the attack on the AMIA headquarters, an attack took place at the headquarters of the Israeli Embassy located in the city of Buenos Aires, as a result of an explosion of explosive material in a Ford F-100 pickup. The attack caused the destruction of the diplomatic headquarters and damaged nearby buildings and vehicles parked in the area. 22 people died and more than 350 were injured73. IACHR, Report on Terrorism and Human Rights. October 22, 2002. Chapter II A, para. 33. Chapter II A, para. 22. United Nations. Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, Ben Emmerson. Framework principles for ensuring the human rights of victims of terrorism*. June 4, 2012. A/HRC/20/14, para. 20. 70 United Nations. Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, Ben Emmerson. Framework principles for ensuring the human rights of victims of terrorism*. June 4, 2012. A/HRC/20/14, para. 20. 71 United Nations. Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, Ben Emmerson. Framework principles for ensuring the human rights of victims of terrorism*. June 4, 2012. A/HRC/20/14, para. 21. 72 United Nations. Report of the Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, Ben Emmerson. Framework principles for ensuring the human rights of victims of terrorism*. June 4, 2012. A/HRC/20/14, para. 22. 73 Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation. Press Release "Report on the status of the case concerning the bombing of the Israeli Embassy." March 4, 2015. 68 69 21