56 81. The events under review in this case have a particularly adverse impact because of the historic context within which they have taken place —systematic practice of illegal and arbitrary detentions, torture, extra-legal executions and forced disappearances perpetrated by State security and intelligence forces, the characteristics and dynamics of which were outlined based on proven facts (above paras. 80(1)-80(8)). In other words, those severe facts fall within the systematic mechanism of repression to which certain sectors of the population were subjected as they had been labeled as subversive or somehow contrary or in opposition to the Government, which was known to or even ordered by the highest command of the armed forced, the intelligence services and the then governing Executive, by means of the State’s ordinary security forces, the operation of the so-called “Grupo Colina” and a framework of impunity favoring these violations. 82. The particular severity of these incidents unveils the existence of a whole structure of organized power and encoded procedures ruling the practice of extra-legal execution and forced disappearance. By no means were these incidents isolated or sporadic instances, but they constituted a pattern of conduct prevailing over the time these events took place as a method for the elimination of members of, and individuals suspected of cooperating with, subversive organizations, used systematically and in a generalized fashion by state actors — mostly by members of the Armed Forces. 83. Owing to its decisive role in this case, regard must be had to the participation of the so-called Colina Group, which was entrusted by the very command of the armed forces with a governmental policy for the identification, control and elimination of those persons suspected of cooperating with insurgent groups, by means of systematic and indiscriminate extra-legal executions, selective murder, forced disappearance and torture. The group was organized directly as part of the hierarchical structure of the Peruvian Army, and its activities and operations were —according to several sources— known to the Presidency of the Peruvian Republic and the Army Command (above paras. 80(17)and 80(18)). 84. This situation has likewise been considered in other cases decided by this Tribunal, the events of which took place over the same time-span as the ones involved in this case. Thus, this Court has passed its decision regarding the systematic practice carried out under the orders of the military and police officers in charge, the existence and methods used by 82 the Colina Group, and their responsibility for said events. Regarding to the characteristics 83 of the events in La Cantuta over the referenced period, said context was also ratified by the Inter-American Commission, and by the Special Rapporteur of the United Nations on 84 Extra-legal or Summary Executions, after his visit to Perú in 1993. 85. Furthermore, the foregoing Peruvian context and situations have been acknowledged by the convergent decisions adopted by the three powers of the State: the Executive, as it 82 Cf. Case of Gómez Palomino. Judgment of November 22, 2005. Series C No. 136, para. 54.1; Case of Huilca Tecse vs. Perú, Judgment of March 3, 2005, Series C, No. 21, para. 60(9), and Case of Gómez Paquiyauri brothers. Judgment July 8, 2004. Series C No. 110, para. 76. 83 Cf. Report of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights No. 101/01 in the Case 10.247 and others. Extra-legal Executions and forced disappearance of persons. Perú, October 11, 2001, paras. 163, 164, 170, 172 and 174.; and Report of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights on the situation of Human Rights in Perú, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.83 Doc.31, March 12, 1993, paras. 8, 9 and 90. 84 Cf. United Nations Human Rights Committed. The question of violations of human rights and fundamental liberties in any part of the world, particularly in colonial countries and territories and dependent areas. Extra-legal, summary or arbitrary executions. Addenda. Report of the Special Relator, Sr. B. W. Ndiaye, on his misión to Perú on May 24 through June 2, 2993, E/CN.4/1994/7/Add.2, November 15, 1993, para. 54.