89 indiscriminate manner against any inmate without attending to the fact that they had surrendered or turned themselves in; g) the type of weapons employed during the incursion leads to conclude that the state agent’s intention was to cause serious physical and psychological damage, as well as the elimination of the greatest number of inmates possible; h) the authorities’ lack of prevention in avoiding the entrance of weapons in the criminal center and their possession, the tenancy of home-made explosives by the inmates, and the disproportionate use of force throughout the 4 days that the incursion lasted, allow the attribution to the State of the deaths occurred as of the first day of the operative “Transfer 1” and up to the moments prior to the surrender of the inmates, on May 9, 1992, constituting violations to Article 4 of the American Convention and a failure to comply with the general obligation of respect and guarantee contemplated in Article 1(1) of the same; “Extrajudicial killings” i) in the final arguments it indicated that “the lack of training as well as th lack of control in the operative is evident, in cases such as that of the criminal center Castro Castro, in facts that result in the extra-legal execution of unarmed inmates. In these cases it is proven that the use of fire weapons is not necessary and that, in any case, the motives announces for the operation are not real;” j) once the prisoners “were forced to yield” and they were notoriously defenseless, several of them being seriously injured, the State had the duty to treat those people in humanly manner under all circumstances, and to avoid any type of damage to them, without the use of lethal force being justifiable. After the prisoners’ surrender, the police executed in a selective manner at least 11 inmates while they exited pavilion 4B; and afterwards at least 5 prisoners were separated by the police from the group of inmates that had surrendered and were located in the courtyard called “no man’s land”, showing up dead in other parts of the criminal center. Those 16 people, identified before the events as leaders of “Sendero Luminoso”, were extra-legally executed, presumably in compliance with orders from the Army’s Intelligence Director, the Commander of the Armed Forces, and the President of the Republic himself, therefore the Commission argues the violation of Article 4 of the Convention and of the general obligation of respect and guarantee contemplated in Article 1(1) of the same instrument, also for these events; k) in its final arguments it stated that, at least in one case, one of the inmates was transferred alive to the morgue, where they planned to kill him, action prevented by his mother and a doctor of said establishment; “Lack of investigation” l) when the use of force has caused death, or even injuries, the State has an international obligation to determine, through independent and impartial judicial bodies, if the force used was excessive and, in its case, must punish the perpetrators and planners, as well as compensate the victims or