located nearby. After the three individuals were imprisoned, around four hundred individuals belonging to the Puñachizag and Shaushi communities showed up at the police station seeking to free OM and OF and carry out justice with their own hands against Fredy Núñez Naranjo, whom they took to the Puñachizag Community along with his family members, Ms. María Gregoria Naranjo and Ms. Marcia Núñez Naranjo. After suffering attacks, the women were eventually released. As to Mr. Núñez Naranjo, since that date, there has been no information about his whereabouts other than the statements from the Peasant Board of the Quero Canton suggesting that he may have been taken to the Shaushi Community jail cells. 2 5. During the process, the State made a partial acknowledgment of international responsibility for the violation of Articles 8(1) and 25(1) in relation to Article 1(1) of the American Convention on Human Rights. Furthermore, it expressed its position on the commission of enforced disappearance in the instant case. 3 On the first point, the Ecuadorian State acknowledged partial international responsibility for violating the duty to ensure the necessary guarantees and judicial protection due to its lack of due diligence in the investigation and prosecution of the perpetrators. On the second point, the State argued that the facts did not describe enforced disappearance, but rather contended that it was an "alleged criminal offense" supposedly perpetrated by individuals. 4 It is worth mentioning that the Ecuadorian State recognized the participation of non-state actors in the events that led to the disappearance of Fredy Núñez Naranjo but not its own responsibility regarding the behavior of such actors. 6. In the judgment, the Court determines part of the facts of the case being that the main line of investigation undertaken by national authorities linked the perpetration of the criminal offense of "kidnapping" 5 to the actions of members of the Puñachizag and Shaushi communities. These communities formed part of the Peasant Defense Boards which, according to the determination of the facts of the case, were characterized as follows: (…) the "Provincial Federation of Peasant Defense Boards of Tungurahua Province," created in that same province in 1966, (…) was created with the purpose of bringing together the Peasant Defense Boards of the province as a form of social organization recognized by Ecuadorian domestic law, whose purpose is to defend the "rights and interests" common to its members. The State did not provide the information requested on the current legal status of peasant defense boards. However, it has been established that they were active in the Quero Canton and were recognized by the State. 6 Cf.Case of Núñez Naranjo et al. v. Ecuador, supra, paras. 41-45; 88. Cf. Case of Núñez Naranjo et al. v. Ecuador, supra, para. 14. "During the public hearing held on February 3, 2023, the State partially acknowledged international responsibility for the violation of the rights enshrined in Articles 8(1) and 25(1) of the American Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) of the same instrument due to the lack of diligence in determining responsibilities for the commission of a criminal offense against Fredy Núñez Naranjo but rejected that the elements of a forced disappearance are present in the case." 4 Cf. Case of Núñez Naranjo et al. v. Ecuador, supra, para. 22. 5 "The crime of kidnapping is committed by taking possession of another person through violence, threats, seduction, or deception, whether to sell them or put them against their will in the service of another, or to obtain any benefit, or to force them to pay a ransom or deliver a movable thing, or to extend, deliver, or sign a document that has or may have legal effects, or to force them to do or refrain from doing something, or to force a third party to perform one of the indicated acts aimed at the release of the kidnapped person." Information provided by the State in its Answering brief. 6 Cf. Case of Núñez Naranjo et al. v. Ecuador, supra, para. 39. 2 3 2