52 that persisted over time. 181 Third, the lack of a burial in accordance with the traditions of the Maya Achí culture severed the relations of reciprocity and harmony between the living and the dead, affecting the union of the families with their ancestors. 182 Fourth, the forced disappearance and displacement caused the separation and/or disintegration of families, as discussed in the next chapter infra. 166. For these reasons, the Court considers that in this case Guatemala also violated Article 17(1) of the American Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) of the same instrument, to the detriment of the next of kin of the 22 victims of forced disappearance. IX.II RIGHT TO MOVEMENT AND RESIDENCE 183 A. Arguments of the Commission and the parties 167. The Commission alleged that the residents of Chichupac and neighboring communities were forced to abandon their villages, leaving their belongings, homes and land destroyed or abandoned, and were initially displaced to nearby communities or to the mountains. It emphasized that, in this context of fear and insecurity due to persecution by the State, these people spent several months and even years struggling to survive threats and persecution, hunger and lack of access to health services and education. It held that from the end of 1983, the survivors of Chichupac village were resettled in the model village established by the National Army, in precarious living conditions and subject to permanent military control. It also noted that the facts of the case were part of a generalized situation of forced internal displacement that particularly affected the indigenous populations, caused by the acts of terror to which they were subjected during the armed conflict. Therefore, it concluded that Guatemala is responsible for the violation of Article 22(1) of the Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) of said treaty, to the detriment of the survivors of the village of Chichupac and neighboring communities. 168. In its final observations, the Commission noted that the forced displacements continued for many years and are acts of a continuous or ongoing nature. It argued that in addition to forced displacement, other related violations occurred in the instant case that have continued and whose effects have persisted over time owing to the prolonged failure of the State to offer an adequate response in terms of reparation. In this regard, it pointed out that the ongoing destruction of the social structure, the disengagement with community leaders and the loss of cultural and traditional practices, as well as of the Achi Mayan language, continue to destroy and annihilate the Mayan culture, to the detriment of the survivors and neighboring communities. Regarding this last point, it alleged the violation of freedom of conscience and religion and freedom of association, established in Articles 12 and 16 of the Convention. 169. The representatives agreed with the Commission that the State violated the rights to movement and residence of the alleged victims, who suffered massive and collective forced 181 This is the case of: Juan Pérez Sic, Lorenzo Depaz Siprian, Leonardo Cahuec Gonzalés, Juan Mendoza Alvarado and his father José Cruz Mendoza Sucup, María Concepción Chen Sic, Casimiro Siana, Cruz Pérez Ampérez, Gorgonio Gonzalez Gonzalez, Jorge Galeano Román, Eustaquio lxtecoc Gonzalez, Rafael Depaz Tecú, Enrique Mendoza Sis, Gabino Román Yvoy, Dionicio Vachan. 182 In this regard, the psychologist Nieves Gómez Dupuis explained that "[i]n the Achi Maya culture there is a special relationship between the living and the dead. The living are in charge of watching over, giving dignified burial to the dead and visiting them on the days designated for this purpose. The burials are carried out by the family and the community with rituals to accompany the passage between life and death. In turn, the deceased and the ancestors, in a reciprocal relationship, are in charge of protecting the living, giving them warnings and advice for their daily lives. The relations of reciprocity and harmony are also present between nature, the cosmos and human beings.” Cf. Report on the harm to mental (moral) health prepared by the psychologist Nieves Gómez Dupuis on May 5, 2010, and presented to the Inter-American Commission(evidence file, folios 1313 and 1321). 183 Where pertinent, Article 22(1) of the Convention establishes that: “Every person lawfully in the territory of a State Party has the right to move about in it, and to reside in it subject to the provisions of the law.”