of Jeremías Osorio Rivera, in relation to the obligations to respect and ensure rights 202 established in the American Convention. Subsequently, the Court will analyze the alleged violations of judicial guarantees and judicial protection 203 in the context of the domestic criminal proceedings held as a result of the facts of this case, as well as the obligation to adopt provisions of domestic law. Lastly, the Court will examine the alleged violation of the personal integrity of the family members. In addition, the Court will take a decision on the alleged violations of the Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearance of Persons. VII-1 RIGHTS TO PERSONAL LIBERTY, PERSONAL INTEGRITY, LIFE, AND JURIDICAL PERSONALITY, IN RELATION TO THE OBLIGATION TO RESPECT AND ENSURE THE RIGHTS AND TO THE OBLIGATIONS CONTAINED IN ARTICLE I OF THE INTER-AMERICAN CONVENTION ON FORCED DISAPPEARANCE OF PERSONS, TO THE DETRIMENT OF JEREMÍAS OSORIO RIVERA A. Determination of the existence of the alleged enforced disappearance A.1. Arguments of the parties and of the Commission 102. The Commission established that it had been proved that Jeremías Osorio Rivera was detained by members of the Peruvian Army who belonged to the Cajatambo Counter-subversive Base on April 28, 1991, “and was held incommunicado in a military base in the community of Nunumia, Gorgor district, province of Cajatambo, department of Lima, until April 30, 1991.” It also stated that, on that date, the members of the presumed victim’s family and several villagers from Cochas Paca saw him for the last time. In addition, the soldiers responsible for the detention gave out false information about his whereabouts and, before that, had refused to provide information on the presumed victim’s situation. Consequently, the Commission considered that the foregoing elements were sufficient to conclude that what happened to Jeremías Osorio Rivera should be classified as an enforced disappearance, in the terms of Article II of the Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearance of Persons. 103. In particular, the Commission indicated that the circumstances surrounding the arrest and transfer of Jeremías Osorio Rivera and the way in which information on his whereabouts was released were consistent with the modus operandi for enforced disappearances used by the security forces during the internal armed conflict in Peru. The Commission emphasized the relevance of taking into consideration the well-known context of gross human rights violations 200 The pertinent part of Article 5 of the American Convention stipulates that: “1. Every person has the right to have his physical, mental, and moral integrity respected. 2. No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman, or degrading punishment or treatment. All persons deprived of their liberty shall be treated with respect for the inherent dignity of the human person.” 201 Article 7(1) of the American Convention states that: “[e]very person has the right to personal liberty and security.” 202 Article 1(1) of the American Convention establishes: “[t]he 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.” 203 Article 8(1) of the American Convention stipulates that: “[e]very 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.” While Article 25(1) of the American Convention establishes that: “[e]veryone 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.” 38