113. In sum, another consequence of the intimidating effect of the facts described in this section is that the public loses relevant voices and points of view, women's voices and points of view in particular, 259 which, in turn, leads to a widening of the gender gap in the journalism profession and attacks pluralism as an essential element of freedom of expression and democracy. 260 This is especially relevant in the context of the region (at the time of the events and currently) in view—in the words of the Commission's Office of the Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression—of the existence of a “widespread phenomenon of the exclusion of women from public life” and “low participation of women in the media agenda.” 261 Furthermore, the Court wishes to highlight the importance of the necessary plurality of the media, since, as the witness Catalina Botero stated, “by silencing women journalists, the stories are silenced that are usually only told by women.” 262 114. Based on the foregoing, the Court concludes that Colombia violated the obligation to respect and guarantee Ms. Bedoya's right to freedom of thought and expression, enshrined in Article 13 of the American Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) of that treaty. b.3 Conclusion 115. By virtue of the analysis and considerations set forth in this chapter, the Court concludes that the State is responsible for the violation of articles 5(1) and 7 of the American Convention, in relation to the obligations contained in Article 1(1) of the same instrument, and articles 7(a) and 7(b) of the Convention of Belém do Pará. The State is also responsible for the violation of Articles 5(2) and 11 of the American Convention, in relation to the obligations contained in Article 1(1) of the same instrument, articles 7(a) and 7(b) of the Convention of Belém do Pará, and the articles 1 and 6 of the ICPPT for the sexual violence to which Ms. Bedoya was subjected. These violations also impacted Ms. Bedoya's right to freedom of thought and expression, for which reason the State is responsible for the violation of Article 13 of the American Convention, in relation to the obligations set forth in Article 1(1) of the same instrument. b.4 Other violations of the American Convention alleged by the Commission and the representatives 116. With respect to the alleged violation of articles 4 and 24 of the Convention indicated by the Commission, the Court observes that no arguments or corresponding probative support were offered for analysis of these violations. Regarding the representatives’ argument that the aforementioned facts also entailed a violation of the right to defend human rights, the Court finds that the duty to guarantee this right is sufficiently addressed in the analysis carried out in this section through the rights declared violated. 263 259 Cf. Statement made before a notary public by Catalina Botero Marino, of March 4, 2021 (evidence file, folio 39934). Cf. Case of Granier et al. (RCTV) v. Venezuela. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of June 22, 2015. Series C No. 293, para. 170. 260 261 Cf. IACHR, Office of the Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. Women Journalists and Freedom of Expression: Discrimination and Gender-Based Violence Faced by Women Journalists in the Exercise of their Profession, OEA/SER.L/V/II CIDH/RELE/INF.20/18, October 31, 2018, para. 25. Likewise, according to witness Catalina Botero Marino, the "silencing effect" of violence directed at women journalists is "very powerful," since "few women dare to practice the journalism profession in contexts of widespread criminality, and those who do must face extraordinary risks and differentiated impacts.” Cfr. Statement made before a notary public by Catalina Botero Marino, of March 4, 2021 (evidence file, folio 39934). 262 Cf. Statement made before a notary public by Catalina Botero Marino, of March 4, 2021 (evidence file, folio 39934). Cf. Case of Human Rights Defender et al. v. Guatemala. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of August 28, 2014. Series C No. 283, para. 193. 263 44