16 d. therefore, the State is responsible for the violation of the rights to life, to personal integrity, to personal liberty, to juridical personality, and to the obligation to “punish these violations in a serious and effective manner,” recognized in Articles 3, 4, 5, 7, and 1(1) of the American Convention, Articles I(b), III, IV, and V of the Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearances of Persons and Articles 6 and 8 of the Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture, to the detriment of Maria Claudia Garcia. 43. The representatives argued that: a. the enforced disappearance of Maria Claudia Garcia, carried out by State officials operating under the protection of Operation Condor, involved an “automatic and immediate” violation of her right to personal liberty; b. her enforced disappearance is a multiple violation to various rights protected by the Convention, those of which, committed in a context of a systematic pattern, constitute a crime against humanity; c. since it came into force for the State and given the continuous nature of the crime of enforced disappearance and that, to date, the whereabouts of María Claudia García remain unknown, the Inter-American Convention on the Forced Disappearance of Persons is “directly applicable to the case”; d. Uruguay, contrary to its State obligation to maintain those persons deprived of liberty in detention centers that are officially recognized and to present the detainee before a competent judicial authority without delay; e. in relation to the alleged violation of Article 5 of the Convention, and in consideration of the definition of the crime of torture established in Article 2 of the Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture, as well as the definition of violence against women contained in Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention of Belém do Pará, the unlawful detention, solitary confinement, and suffering inflicted on María Claudia García are particularly serious given her vulnerability due to the advanced state of pregnancy, which “allow for the inference that María Claudia [García] was a victim of psychological torture during the time she was in detention.” Said facts constitute an "immediate" violation to her personal integrity due to the acts of torture; f. the enforced disappearance of Maria Claudia "can be understood as a brutal violation of [her] right to life," not only because the practice frequently implies the secret executions of the prisoners, but also because the State did not adopt the measures necessary to protect and preserve this right; and, g. in relation to Article 3 of the Convention, the enforced disappearance, and subsequent denial and obstruction of the truth by the State, prevented María Claudia García from exercising her rights, such as that of being able to file a complaint to question the legality of her detention and the “right of legal recognition of her maternity."