40 their very existence as human beings entitled to be recognized as such before the law,” and, therefore, has found 160 that Article 3 of the Convention has been violated. 205. The Human Rights Committee has concluded that one of the violations that may result from 161 forced disappearance is a denial of the victim’s right to recognition as a person before the law . 206. Likewise, Article 7(2)(i) of the 1998 Rome Statute provides that “Enforced disappearance of persons” means “the arrest, detention or abduction of persons by, or with the authorization, support or acquiescence of, a State or a political organization, followed by a refusal to acknowledge that deprivation of freedom or to give information on the fate or whereabouts of those persons, with the intention of removing them from the protection of the law for a prolonged period of time.” 207. Similarly, the definition contained in Article 2 of the International Convention for the Protection of all Persons from Forced Disappearance (2006) recognizes that the adverse consequence of the refusal to acknowledge the deprivation of liberty or whereabouts of the disappeared person is, in combination with other 162 elements of the disappearance, to “place such a person outside the protection of the law.” 208. Equally, the United Nations Independent Expert on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearance of Persons has Stated that forced disappearance can also entail violation of the right to recognition as a person before the law on the basis that acts of enforced disappearance are aimed at removing the victim from the 163 protection of the law. 209. For its part, the Inter-American Court has recognized that that one of the characteristics of forced disappearance, in contrast to extra-legal executions, is that it implies the State’s refusal to acknowledge that the victim is under its custody and provide information in that regard, in order to create uncertainty as to his 164 whereabouts, life or death, cause intimidation, and suppress his rights. 210. The violation of the right to legal personality that comes with forced disappearance is such that several States in the region have had to adopt specific laws to distinguish this phenomenon from extrajudicial execution. The State prevents living people from exercising their rights and obligations because the State denies 165 their final fate. In particular, the States have adopted several acts and established case-law in light of the lack of specific rules regarding the absence of a person due to forced disappearance and the corresponding inability to 160 IACHR, Report 11/98 (Case 10.606 – Guatemala), par. 57; Report 55/99 (Cases 10.815, 10.905, 10.981, 10.995, 11.042, 11.136 – Peru), par. 111; Report 56/98 (Cases 10.824, 11.044, 11.124, 11.125, 11.175 – Peru), par. 110; Report 3/98 (Case 11.221 – Colombia), par. 64; Report 30/96 (Case 10.897 – Guatemala), par. 23; and Report 55/96 (Case 8076 Guatemala), par. 24. 161 Human Rights Committee of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Communication 1327/2004. Grioua v. Algeria. paras. 7.8 and 7.9. 162 Adopted by United Nations General Assembly resolution A/RES/61/177 of 20 December 2006. 163 United Nations, Report submitted by Mr. Manfred Nowak, independent expert charged with examining the existing international criminal and human rights framework for the protection of persons from enforced or involuntary disappearances, pursuant to paragraph 11 of Commission resolution 2001/46, E/CN.4/2002/71, 8 January 2002, para. 70. 164 165 I/A Court H.R, Case of Anzualdo Castro v. Peru, Judgment of September 22, 2009, Series C No. 202, par. 91. For example, in the case of detainees-disappeared persons who remain alive the State denies the right of access to a judge if they are in detention, and in the case of detainees-disappeared persons who had been executed it denies the consequential rights of the deceased persons’ next-of-kin, such as, rights of inheritance, for instance, which are obstructed by the indeterminate legal status of the detainee-disappeared person.