27 persons accused of belonging to the Shining Path were subjected to arbitrary detention, torture and 128 forced disappearance in the province of Cajatambo, particularly between 1989 and 1992 . 106. As detailed in paragraphs 54 and 67 above, Mr. Osorio’s journey between the school of Nunumia and the Counter-subversive Base of Cajatambo lasted several hours. He remained handcuffed meanwhile and with a hood covering his head. According to the established facts, four peasants of Chochas-Paca, Cajatambo province, participated to the journey along with the Army personnel. Mr. Porfirio Osorio Rivera’s statements to the domestic judicial authorities indicate that three of these persons reported that the victim wandered with difficulties and that he was obliged to walk by himself, without 129 receiving food from the militaries . 107. In view of the aforesaid, the IACHR finds that the acts of violence perpetrated against Jeremías Osorio Rivera during his transfer to the Cajatambo Counter-subversive Base on April 30, 1991, were committed deliberately and caused him intense physical and mental suffering. Considering the circumstances in which they took place and in view of the statements issued by Lieutenant Juan Carlos Tello Delgado to the peasants of the region that the victim was a member of the Shining Path, the IACHR deems that the purpose of such violent acts was to punish and intimidate Mr. Jeremías Osorio. The Commission therefore concludes that those acts of violence constitute torture, in the terms of Article 5.2 of the American Convention. 108. The Inter-American Court has ruled that the right to life is a fundamental human right, and 130 that its full exercise is essential for the exercise of all other human rights. That means that states have the obligation to guarantee the creation of the conditions required in order that violations of this basic right 131 do not occur and, in addition, the duty to prevent its agents or private citizens from violating it. According to the Court, the object and purpose of the Convention, as an instrument for the protection of the human being, requires that the right to life be interpreted and enforced so that its guarantees are truly 132 practical and effective (effet utile). 109. The Court has also stressed that “compliance with the duties imposed by Article 4 of the American Convention, in conjunction with Article 1(1) thereof, does not only presuppose that no person can be arbitrarily deprived of his life (negative duty) but also requires, pursuant to its obligation to guarantee the full and free exercise of human rights, that the States adopt any and all necessary measures to protect and preserve the right to life (positive duty) of the individuals under their 133 jurisdiction.” Consequently: States must adopt all necessary measures to create a legal framework that deters any possible threat to the right to life; establish an effective legal system to investigate, punish, and redress deprivation of life by State officials or private individuals; and guarantee the right to unimpeded access to conditions for a dignified life. Especially, States must see that their security forces, which are entitled to use legitimate force, respect the right to life of the individuals under their 134 jurisdiction 128 See paragraph 47 above. See parapraph 56 above. 130 I/A Court H. R., Case of Zambrano Vélez et al. v. Ecuador, Merits, Reparations, and Costs, Judgment of July 4, 2007, Series C No. 166, para. 78; and Case of the Street Children (Villagrán Morales et al.) v. Guatemala, Judgment of November 19, 1999, Series C No. 63, para. 144. 129 131 I/A Court H. R., The Street Children Case (Villagrán Morales et al.) v. Guatemala, Judgment of November 19, 1999, Series C No. 63, para. 144. 132 I/A Court H. R., Case of Zambrano Vélez et al. v. Ecuador, Merits, Reparations, and Costs, Judgment of July 4, 2007, Series C No. 166, para. 79; and Case of Baldeón García v. Peru, Judgment of April 6, 2006, Series C No. 147, para. 83. 133 I/A Court H. R., Case of Zambrano Vélez et al., supra note 135, para. 80; The Street Children Case (Villagrán Morales et al.), supra note 135, para. 144. 134 I/A Court H. R., Case of Zambrano Vélez et al., supra note 135, para. 81; Case of Montero Aranguren et al. (Detention Center of Catia), Judgment of July 5, 2006, Series C No. 150, para. 66.