framework of the criminal proceedings initiated before the military jurisdiction and before the ordinary jurisdiction, it was not possible to clarify what happened, an issue that will be analyzed below (infra para 150). 111. Given these circumstances, the Court recalls that its actions are not those of a criminal court in which the criminal responsibility of individuals can be determined,101 given that such matter corresponds to domestic authorities. Likewise, the Court has indicated that, under Article 1(1) of the Convention, in order to establish that there has been a violation of the rights recognized in said instrument, and unlike in domestic criminal law, it is not necessary to prove the responsibility of the State beyond all reasonable doubt, nor that the agents to whom the violating acts are attributed be individually identified, or to establish the guilt of the perpetrators or their intention.102 This Court only needs to have the conviction that actions or omissions have been verified that are attributable to the State, and that there is an international obligation that the State has breached.103 112. For its part, as inter-American case law has also reiterated, in cases such as the one here under analysis, in which the use of force by state agents has caused the death or injury of one or more persons, the State is required to provide a satisfactory and convincing explanation of what happened and refute the allegations of its responsibility by providing adequate evidence.104 The above will be taken into account by the Court as appropriate. 113. Upon analyzing whether the parameters that should govern the use of force by security forces in the instant case, it is noted that, as to the requirement of legality, the State indicated that the regulatory framework adopted to "guarantee and protect the right to life" was included in article 23 of the Political Constitution of 1998,105 which was in force at the time of the facts, and the following ordinary legislation, also in force at that time: a) the Criminal Code of 1971, which "codified crimes against the right to life," and b) the Military Criminal Code, whose articles 170 and 171 “provided for the concepts of homicide and murder.” 106 Ecuador also mentioned the Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials (supra footnote 96), and the Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials,107 which it stated Cf. Case of Suárez Rosero v. Ecuador. Merits. Judgment of November 12, 1997. Series C No. 35, para. 37, and Case of Mota Abarullo et al. v. Venezuela. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of November 18, 2020. Series C No. 417, para. 69. 102 Cf. Case of the “White Van” (Paniagua-Morales et al.) v. Guatemala. Merits. Judgment of March 08, 1998. Series C No. 37, para. 91; Case of Rodríguez Vera et al. (The Disappeared from the Palace of Justice) v. Colombia Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of November 14, 2014. Series C No. 287, para. 81, and Case of Díaz Loreto et al. v. Venezuela. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of November 19, 2019. Series C No. 392, para. 69. 103 Cf. Case of Velásquez-Rodríguez v. Honduras Fund, supra, para. 173, and Case of Díaz Loreto et al. v. Venezuela, supra, para. 69. 104 Cf. Case of Montero-Aranguren et al. (Detention Center of Catia) v. Venezuela, supra, para. 80, and Case of Roche Azaña et al. v. Nicaragua, supra, para. 69. Even in the case of Cruz Sánchez et al. v. Peru, the Court highlighted that in this matter “the burden of proof is reversed.” Cf. Case of Cruz Sánchez et al. v. Peru Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of April 17, 2015. Series C No. 292, para. 291. 105 Article 23 of the Political Constitution of the Republic of Ecuador, published on August 11, 1998, and repealed by the Constitution of the Republic of Ecuador of 2008 (evidence file, volume XIII, folios 11102 to 11162): Notwithstanding the rights established in this Constitution and in the international instruments in force, the State will recognize and guarantee the following to people: 1. The inviolability of life. […] 2. Humane treatment […].” 106 Military Criminal Code, published on November 6, 1961, and repealed by Law No. 0, published on May 19, 2010 (evidence file, volume XIII, folios 11243 to 11269): Article 170: Those who cause the death of a person, with any of the aggravating circumstances determined in Article 27, will be responsible for murder and will be punished with extraordinary imprisonment and expulsion from the Armed Forces. Article 171: Those who cause death without any of these aggravating circumstances will be responsible for simple homicide and will be punished with extraordinary minor imprisonment. 107 Cf. Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials, adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations in its Resolution 34/169, of December 17, 1979. Available at: https://www.ohchr.org/sp/professionalinterest/pages/lawenforcementofficials.aspx. 101 27