36 138. The State did not offer any defense on this point in its answer to the application (supra, paras. 67 and 68). 139. In its final arguments, the Commission underscored the ius cogens nature of the right to life and the fact that it is the essential basis for the exercise of the other rights. The Commission stated that compliance with Article 4 in relation to Article 1.1 of the Convention, not only presumes that no person shall be deprived of his life arbitrarily (negative obligation), but also requires the States to take all necessary measures to protect and preserve the right to life (positive obligation). It concluded, therefore, that the State had violated two aspects of the said right because, when the events took place, the “street children” were the object of different types of persecution, including threats, harassment, torture and murder. In consequence, there were a great many complaints to which the State should have responded with effective investigations, prosecutions and punishment; however, the State agents who were responsible were rarely investigated or convicted, and this gave rise to the de facto impunity that allowed, and even encouraged, the continuation of these violations against the “street children”, increasing their vulnerability. 140. The State kept silent on this point in the final arguments (supra, paras. 67 and 68). 141. Article 4.1 of the Convention stipulates: Every 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. 142. In the instant case there is extensive concurring evidence that it was State agents and, more specifically, members of the National Police Force, who murdered Henry Giovanni Contreras, Federico Clemente Figueroa Túnchez, Julio Roberto Caal Sandoval, Jovito Josué Juárez Cifuentes and Anstraum Aman Villagrán Morales. Indeed: — State agents arrested the four youths whose bodies appeared in the San Nicolás Woods. The events following their seizure, which culminated in the murder of the four youths, involved the use of means of mobilization and aggression that were very similar, if not identical, to those used to carry out the abduction; — according to several witnesses, those who murdered Anstraum Aman Villagrán Morales – like those who abducted the four youths – acted in the city streets, without hiding their faces, moving discreetly in the sight of numerous persons, to the point that, after having killed the victim, they remained in the neighborhood drinking beer and then returned to the place where the body was lying and threatened potential witnesses, before finally leaving the site. — Anstraum Aman Villagrán Morales was a friend of the four youths who were abducted and was often with them. On the night of the facts, he had been warned in threatening terms that he would be killed also, by the administrator of the kiosk, who was a friend of the murderers;