23 a) Torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment constituted a systematic and generalized practice and was used as an instrument in the fight against insurgency during the criminal investigations into crimes of treason and terrorism in order to extract information from detainees suspected of belonging to a subversive organization, either in order to organize operations against that group or as input for criminal proceedings through self-incrimination or accusations against others. b) In particular, numerous acts were perpetrated that constituted a generalized and aberrant practice of rape (including the introduction of objects into the vagina and/or the anus and repeated collective rapes of the same woman), and other forms of sexual violence (sexual abuse, sexual blackmail, sexual harassment or fondling, forced nudity, insults, threats of rape with objects, and electric shocks to the breasts and genital region), mainly against women. That generalized context of sexual violence was inserted in a broader context of discrimination against women, who were considered vulnerable and whose body was used by the perpetrator without any apparent reason or strict relationship to the conflict. c) The information available indicates that the main perpetrators of these acts were State officials or individuals who acted with their authorization and/or acquiescence; however, the illegal armed groups such as the Communist Party of Peru - Shining Path and the Túpac Amaru Revolutionary Movement (MRTA) can also be held responsible. d) These practices were facilitated by the permanent use of states of emergency during which the constitutional guarantees of personal liberty and security, the inviolability of the home, and freedom of association and movement throughout the territory were suspended. e) Following the coup d’état of April 5, 1992, and until the end of the dictatorship in November 2000, this generalized context of massive human rights violations took place under a dictatorship that had suspended the effects of the Constitution. 68. This context permits the Court to analyze the facts alleged in this case taking into account the existence of a generalized and systematic practice of torture and sexual violence against women in Peru, rather than in an isolated manner, in order to understand the evidence and establish the facts. Likewise, this context will be taken into account, when appropriate, to establish measures of reparation, specifically with regard to guarantees of non-repetition. Lastly, this context will be used in order to assess whether it is in order to apply specific standards concerning the obligation to investigate in this case (infra paras. 119, 139, 148, 179, 185, 195, 214, 225, 242, 297 and 309). 56 B) The proven facts concerning Gladys Carol Espinoza Gonzáles 69. Gladys Carol Espinoza Gonzáles was born in Lima, Peru, on June 3, 1953. She is the daughter of Teodora Gonzáles and Fausto Espinoza León 57 and the sister of Manuel Espinoza Gonzáles. From 1977 to 1982 she studied at the Faculty of International Relations and International Law of the State University of Kiev, Ukraine, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, and concluded the specialty of International Law with a master’s degree: Master of Law (LLM). 58 B.1. The arrest of Gladys Carol Espinoza Gonzáles and the time she spent at the headquarters of the DIVISE and the DINCOTE 56 Cf. mutatis mutandi, Case of La Cantuta v. Peru, supra, para. 157, and Case of Contreras et al. v. El Salvador. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of August 31, 2011. Series C No. 232, para. 127. 57 58 Cf. Preliminary statement of Gladys Carol Espinoza Gonzáles of June 5, 1993 (evidence file, folio 7304). Cf. University studies in International Law with a master’s degree (Master of Laws (LLM)) from the Faculty of International Relations and International Law of the State University of Kiev, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, awarded on June 22, 1982 (evidence file, folios 1465 to 1467).