29 Argument of the representatives 74. In the submission of requests and arguments, the representatives raised the same arguments offered by the Commission regarding Article 4 of the Convention, in connection with the death of Mr. Bernabé Baldeón-García. Argument of the State 75. The State acknowledged its international liability for the violation of Article 4 of the Convention to the detriment of Mr. Bernabé Baldeón-García (supra para. 20). Considerations of the Court 76. The Court considers that the acquiescence by the State to the violation of Article 4 (Right to Life) of the American Convention, to the detriment of Mr. Bernabé Baldeón-García, in relation to the events of September 25 and 26, 1990 (supra para. 20), constitutes a positive contribution to the development of these proceedings and to the enforcement of the principles underlying the American Convention42 (supra para. 55). 77. Notwithstanding the foregoing, and given the disturbing circumstances surrounding the death of Mr. Bernabé Baldeón-García and the alleged lack of due diligence on the part of State authorities to ensure effective protection and respect for the human rights of the victim, the Court considers it relevant to analyze certain aspects related to the violation of Article 4 (Right to Life) of the Convention (supra para. 58). 78. Article 1(1) of the Convention sets forth: The States Parties to this Convention undertake to respect the rights and freedoms recognized herein and to ensure to all persons subject to their jurisdiction the free and full exercise of those rights and freedoms, without any discrimination for reasons of race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, economic status, birth, or any other social condition. 79. Article 4(1) of the Convention provides that: [E]very person has the right to have his life respected. This right shall be protected by law and, in general, from the moment of conception. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his life. 80. First, the Court deems it is important to address the issue of the duties imposed by said treaty upon the States Parties. In this regard, the Court has established that the international liability of the States, within the framework of the American Convention, arises from the violation of the general obligations, erga omnes in nature, to respect and enforce respect for - guarantee- the protection standards and to ensure the effectiveness of the rights enshrined therein, in all circumstances and in respect to all persons under their jurisdiction, embodied in Articles 1(1) and 2 of said treaty.43 42 Cf. Case of Gutiérrez-Soler, supra note 4, para. 59; Case of Huilca-Tecse, supra note 3, para. 84; and Case of Carpio-Nicolle et al, supra note 4, para. 84. 43 Cf. Case of the Pueblo Bello Massacre, supra note 6, para. 111; Case of the “Mapiripán Massacre”, supra note 1, para. 111; and Juridical Condition and Rights of the Undocumented Migrants. Advisory Opinion OC-18/03 of September 17, 2003. Series A No. 18, para. 140.