person does not enjoy the protection and guarantees that the law offers, simply because he or she is invisible to it.120 123. By its very nature, forced disappearance of persons seeks the juridical annulment of the individual precisely in order to remove him or her from the protection that the laws and justice afford them. Thus, the apparatus of repression ensures that persons may be deprived of their rights with impunity by placing them beyond the reach of any possible judicial protection. The aim of those who perpetrate forced disappearance is to operate outside the law and conceal any evidence of crime, thereby seeking to avert its investigation and punishment, and prevent the person or their next-of-kin from filing suit or, in the event suit is filed, from accomplishing a positive result.121 124. The Human Rights Committee has concluded that one of the rights that may be violated in cases of forced disappearance of persons is the right to recognition as a person before the law.122 By the same token, Article 7(2)(i) of the 1998 Rome Statute provides that “Enforced disappearance of persons” means “the arrest, detention or abduction of persons by, or with the authorization, support or acquiescence of, a State or a political organization, followed by a refusal to acknowledge that deprivation of freedom or to give information on the fate or whereabouts of those persons, with the intention of removing them from the protection of the law for a prolonged period of time.” 125. Similarly, the definition contained in article II of the 2006 International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance123 establishes that the consequence of refusal to acknowledge the deprivation of liberty and of concealment of the whereabouts of the disappeared person, along with the other elements entailed in disappearance "place such a person outside the protection of the law." Equally, the United Nations Independent Expert on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearance of Persons has stated that forced disappearance can also entail violation of the right to recognition as a person before the law on the basis that acts of enforced disappearance are aimed at removing the victim from the protection of the law.124 126. The Inter-American Commission has consistently held that a person who has been detained and disappeared is “necessarily placed outside of and excluded from the juridical and institutional order of the State, which ha[s] the effect of denying recognition of their very existence as human beings entitled to be recognized as such before the law,” and, therefore, has found that Article 3 of the Convention has been violated."125 In the Anzualdo Castro case, the Inter-American Court upheld the reasoning historically argued by the Commission, the European Court, and quasi-judicial bodies in the universal human rights system and 120 IACHR, Application to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in the Case of Gregoria Herminia Contreras et al. (Cases 12.494, 12.517, and 12.518,) v. Republic of El Salvador, June 28, 2010, paragraph 174. Available at: www.cidh.oas.org/demandas/demandasESP2010.htm. 121 IACHR, Application to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in the Case of Gregoria Herminia Contreras et al. (Cases 12.494, 12.517, and 12.518,) v. Republic of El Salvador, June 28, 2010, paragraph 175. Available at: www.cidh.oas.org/demandas/demandasESP2010.htm. 122 Human Rights Committee of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Communication 1327/2004. Grioua v. Algeria, paragraphs 7.8 and 7.9. 123 Adopted by United Nations General Assembly resolution A/RES/61/177 of 20 December 2006. United Nations, Independent Expert Report submitted by Mr. Manfred Nowak, independent expert charged with examining the existing international criminal and human rights framework for the protection of persons from enforced or involuntary disappearances, pursuant to paragraph 11 of Commission resolution 2001/46, E/CN.4/2002/71, 8 January 2002, paragraph 70. 124 125 IACHR, Report 11/98, Case 10.606, Samuel de la Cruz Gómez, Guatemala, April 7, 1998, paragraph 57. Available at www.cidh.oas.org/annualrep/97span/Guatemala10.606.htm. IACHR, Report 55/99, Merits. Case 10.815 and others, Juan De La Cruz Núñez Santana et al., Peru, April 13, 1999, paragraph 111. Available at www.cidh.oas.org/annualrep/98span/Fondo/Peru%2010.815.htm. IACHR, Report 3/98, Case 11.221, Merits, Tarcisio Medina Charry, Colombia, April 7, 1998, paragraph 64. Available at: www.cidh.oas.org/annualrep/97span/Colombia11.221.htm. IACHR, Report 30/96, Case 10.897, Merits, Arnoldo Juventino Cruz, Guatemala, October 16, 1996, paragraph 23 and IACHR, Report 55/96, Case 8076, Merits, Arnoldo Juventino Cruz,, Guatemala, December 6, 1996, paragraph 24. Available at: www.cidh.oas.org/casos/96sp.htm. 29