62 identified in Annex II of this judgment, are victims of displacement. 204. Furthermore, the Court notes that the alleged violation of Article 12 of the American Convention has been duly considered in the arguments put forward in this chapter, without the need to issue a separate ruling on this point. 205. Finally, the Court notes that the Commission also alleged that Guatemala violated Article 16 of the American Convention. Article 16(1) of the American Convention establishes that those who are under the jurisdiction of the States Parties have the right to associate freely with other persons, without any intervention by the public authorities that may limit or hinder the exercise of that right. This matter, therefore, is about the basic right to form a group for the pursuit of a lawful goal, without pressure or interference that could alter or distort that purpose. 211 Likewise, Article 16(2) of said treaty states that the exercise of the right to associate freely “shall be subject only to such restrictions established by law as may be necessary in a democratic society, in the interest of national security, public safety or public order, or to protect public health or morals or the rights and freedoms of others.” In the instant case, as it did in the Case of the Río Negro Massacres v. Guatemala, 212the Court considers that the village of Chichupac and neighboring communities of the municipality of Rabinal cannot necessarily be classified as an “association” in the terms of Article 16 of the American Convention. In this regard, the Court notes that the Commission did not explain the reasons why these communities, which are of an indigenous nature, would be entitled to the right recognized in Article 16 of the Convention. Therefore, the Court considers that this provision is not applicable to the facts of this case. IX.III JUDICIAL GUARANTEES AND JUDICIAL PROTECTION 213 UNDER THE AMERICAN CONVENTION, FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH ARTICLES I.B OF THE INTER-AMERICAN CONVENTION ON FORCED DISAPPEARANCE OF PERSONS, 214 ARTICLES 1, 6 AND 8 OF THE INTER-AMERICAN CONVENTION TO PREVENT AND PUNISH TORTURE, 215 AND ARTICLE 7.B OF THE INTER-AMERICAN CONVENTION ON THE PREVENTION, PUNISHMENT AND ERADICATION OF VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN 216 211 Cf. Case of Baena Ricardo et al. v. Panama. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of February 2, 2001. Series C No. 61, para. 156, and Case of García and Family Members v. Guatemala, para. 116. 212 Mutatis mutandi, Case of the Río Negro Massacres v. Guatemala. Preliminary objection, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of September 4, 2012. Series C No. 250, paras. 167 to 168. 213 Article 8(1) of the American Convention states: “Every person has the right to a hearing, with due guarantees and within a reasonable time, by a competent, independent, and impartial tribunal, previously established by law, in the substantiation of any accusation of a criminal nature made against him or for the determination of his rights and obligations of a civil, labor, fiscal, or any other nature.” Article 25(1) of the Convention establishes: “Everyone has the right to simple and prompt recourse, or any other effective recourse, to a competent court or tribunal for protection against acts that violate his fundamental rights recognized by the constitution or laws of the state concerned or by this Convention, even though such violation may have been committed by persons acting in the course of their official duties.” 214 Article I.b of the ICFDP establishes: “The States Parties to this Convention undertake: […] b) To punish within their jurisdictions, those persons who commit or attempt to commit the crime of forced disappearance of persons and their accomplices and accessories.” 215 Article 1 of the ICPPT establishes: “The State Parties undertake to prevent and punish torture in accordance with the terms of this Convention.” Article 6 of the ICPPT establishes: “In accordance with the terms of Article 1, the States Parties shall take effective measures to prevent and punish torture within their jurisdiction. The States Parties shall ensure that all acts of torture and attempts to commit torture are offenses under their criminal law and shall make such acts punishable by severe penalties that take into account their serious nature. The States Parties likewise shall take effective measures to prevent and punish other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment within their jurisdiction.” Article 8 of the ICPPT states: “The States Parties shall guarantee that any person making an accusation of having been subjected to torture within their jurisdiction shall have the right to an impartial examination of his case. Likewise, if there is an accusation or well-grounded reason to believe that an act of torture has been committed within their jurisdiction, the States Parties shall guarantee that their respective authorities will proceed properly and immediately to conduct an investigation into the case and to initiate, whenever appropriate, the corresponding criminal process. After all the domestic legal procedures of the respective State and the corresponding appeals have been exhausted, the case may be submitted to the international fora whose competence has been recognized by that State.” 216 Article 7(b) of the Convention of Belém do Pará establishes: “The States Parties condemn all forms of violence