89 State and the corresponding responsibilities, through an investigation and trial, in accordance with the 427 rules set out in Articles 8 and 25 of the Convention. The right to truth forms an important part of the 428 reparation for the victim's family and gives rise to an expectation that the State must satisfy. 406. Similarly, the Inter-American Court has ruled that impunity fosters a repetition of human 429 rights violations. In this sense, the impunity for the events under analysis affects members of 23 displaced communities, who were the target of threats and acts against their security and personal integrity. In effect, the participation of State agents in the planning and execution - without having adopted preventive and protective measures in favor of the civilian population - in such a generalized and 430 systematic attack against a group constitutes a crime against humanity. 407. Finally, as regards the displacement, the Commission has already established that the freedom of movement and residence for the members of the displaced communities was limited by a de facto restriction caused by the fear of acts of violence, including the murder of Marino López and the threats suffered by the victims before and after the displacement (see supra IV.C.5). The fact that the State did not undertake a prompt criminal investigation to put an end to the impunity, among other things, 431 kept the displaced persons away from their ancestral lands and impeded the return of all the displaced. 408. Based on the foregoing considerations, the Commission concludes that the State has not provided the necessary measures to comply with its obligation to investigate, try and punish all those responsible for the human rights violations examined in the present report, in conformity with Articles 8.1 and 25 of the American Convention, in conjunction with Article 1.1 of the same treaty, to the prejudice of Marino López's immediate family, the Cacarica Afro-descendant communities associated in CAVIDA, and the women head of household living in Turbo. Similarly, it concludes that the State has not implemented the necessary measures to comply with its obligation to investigate, try and punish those responsible for the acts of torture committed against Marino López, in conformity with Articles 1, 6, and 8 of the InterAmerican Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture, to the prejudice of Marino López. V. CONCLUSIONS 409. Based on the considerations of fact and law contained in the present report, the Commission concludes as follows: 1. The counter-guerilla military operation known as "Operation Genesis" which was planned by agents of the State of Colombia and undertaken jointly with paramilitary groups, was executed without the State's adoption of appropriate preventive and protective measures for the civilian population. The 427 I/A Court H.R. Case of Barrios Altos. Judgment of March 14, 2001. Series C No. 75, para. 48. Case of Bámaca Vélasquez. Judgment of November 25, 2000. Series C No. 70, para. 201. Case of Blanco Romero et al. Judgment of November 28, 2005. Series C No. 138, para. 62 and Case of Almonacid Arellano et al. Judgment of September 26, 2006. Series C No. 154, para. 148 and Case of Myrna Mack Chang, Judgment of November 25, 2993, paras. 217 and 218, and IACHR Report No. 62/08 Manuel Cepeda Vargas, para. 140. 428 I/A Court H.R., Case of Gómez Palomino. Judgment of November 22, 2005. Series C No. 136, para. 78 and Case of the Serrano Cruz Brothers. Judgment of March 1, 2005. Series C No. 120, para. 62, and IACHR Report No. 62/08 Manuel Cepeda Vargas, para. 140. 429 I/A Court H.R., Case of the Ituango Massacres. Judgment of July 1, 2006. Series C No. 148, para. 299; Case of Baldeón García. Judgment of April 6, 2006. Series C No. 147, para. 168; Case of the Pueblo Bello Massacre. Judgment of January 31, 2006. Series C No. 140, para. 266; Case of the “Mapiripán Massacre” v. Colombia. Judgment of September 15, 2005. Series C No. 134, para. 237; Case Paniagua Morales et al., Judgment of March 8, 1998, para. 173, and IACHR Report No. 62/08 Manuel Cepeda Vargas, para. 141. 430 Cf. I/A Court H.R., Case of Almonacid Arellano et al. v. Chile. Judgment on Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of September 26, 2006. Series C No. 154, para. 96, and IACHR Report No. 62/08 Manuel Cepeda Vargas, para. 141. 431 Cf. Case of the Moiwana Community, June 15, 2005. Series C No. 124 , paras. 107 to 121; See in the same sense Case of Ricardo Canese, Judgment of August 31, 2004. Series C No. 111, paras. 113 to 120 and Case of the “Mapiripán Massacre” v. Colombia. Judgment of September 15, 2005. Series C No. 134, para. 170.