46 the obligations to respect and guarantee rights established in Article 1(1) 170 of the American Convention, to the detriment of fifteen victims in the instant case. A. Arguments of the Commission and the parties 149. The Commission presented the following arguments to support the legal definition of the facts as forced disappearance: a) The facts of this case include the following constituent elements of forced disappearance: i) there was an illegal and arbitrary detention on the part of the State security forces; ii) the victims were taken to an isolated spot a considerable distance from where they where they were detained, precisely for the purpose of covering up and concealing the facts; iii) the authorities refused to cooperate in the judicial investigation; and iv) a few days after the events occurred, military personnel returned to the mine with the intention of erasing all material traces of the crime and preventing any subsequent investigation or clarification. b) The modus operandi used to destroy the evidence in this case coincides with the methods described in the CVR Report, which included the mutilation or incineration of the victims’ mortal remains with the aim of eliminating the evidence of forced disappearance. c) To date, the results of the DNA tests carried out in 2010 have not been delivered to the victims' next of kin, and to this day they do not know exactly, through reliable means that offer certainty, the fate and final whereabouts of the disappeared victims. d) The facts of this case took place in a context in which the victims of forced disappearance in Peru at that time were generally persons identified by the police authorities, the military forces or paramilitary commandos, as alleged members, collaborators or sympathizers of Sendero Luminoso (the Shining Path) or the MRTA. 150. In view of the foregoing, the Commission held that the State violated the rights to personal liberty, personal integrity, life and recognition of juridical personality, recognized in Articles 7, 5, 4(1) and 3 of the American Convention, in relation to the obligations established in Article 1(1) of the same instrument, to the detriment of the fifteen victims in this case, with the aggravating circumstance that seven of the victims were children at the time of the events, in the following terms: a) There was an illegal and arbitrary detention on the part of the State security forces. b) At the time of the events, forced disappearances were often preceded by cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, generally aimed at forcing victims to make self-incriminating confessions, getting them to provide information about subversive groups or instilling fear in the population to deter them from collaborating with these groups. In this specific case, while the fifteen victims were being taken to the “Misteriosa” mine on July 4, 1991, they were beaten and forced to walk for several hours with their hands bound and a rope tied around their necks, and they were not provided with food or water. Consequently, the victims, some of whom were children, were humiliated, tortured and in fear of their lives. c) Based on all the evidence and the CVR Report, it was reasonable to conclude that members of the “Escorpio” military patrol killed the victims and subsequently dynamited their bodies. In its final arguments, the Commission maintained that in cases of forced Article 1(1) of the American Convention establishes that: “The States Parties to this Convention undertake to respect the rights and freedoms recognized herein and to ensure to all persons subject to their jurisdiction the free and full exercise of those rights and freedoms, without any discrimination for reasons of race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, economic status, birth, or any other social condition.” 170