109 homes, thus breaching these persons’ right to choose their place of residence; b) when they left their town, the next of kin of Sinaí Blanco Santamaría, José Rolan Valencia, Antonio María Barrera, Jaime Riaño Colorado, Enrique Pinzón López, Jorge Pinzón López, Luis Eduardo Pinzón López, José Alberto Pinzón López, Fernando Martínez Contreras, Diego Martínez Contreras, and Gustavo Caicedo Rodríguez lost their houses, belongings, lands, harvests, studies, friendships, and relationships; c) despite its international obligations (United Nations Guiding Principles on Internal Displacement) as well as its national obligations (Law 387 of 1997), the State took no steps to prevent displacement of the residents of Mapiripán. The objective of the massacre was precisely to “spread panic among the population” and, therefore, forced displacement of the townspeople was an expected consequence; e) after the facts the women became the heads of families, struggling to survive the threats and harassment, stigmatization, unemployment, hunger, family separation, lack of access to health services and education, housing, among other situations that they faced as displaced persons; f) of the 19 next of kin mentioned in this proceeding, 9 were minors at the time of the facts. These children’s development was severely affected by their displacement, as they had to stop studying to begin to work or care for their younger siblings or to separate from the family to study, they went hungry, lacked medical care or an adequate house, among other situations that constitute violations of the rights of the child. Colombia did not fulfill its duty to protect the boys and girls by not preventing their displacement, by not protecting them while in that situation, by not granting them adequate humanitarian assistance, and by not ensuring their return, resettlement or reintegration under decent and safe conditions. The feelings of family disintegration, insecurity, frustration, anguish and powerlessness generated by forced displacement constitute a violation of the right to humane treatment; and g) to date, the victims live with fear in extremely precarious situations. Despite the duties of the State with regard to this group of women and children, the families have not attained the dignity and security that they enjoyed before the massacre and the displacement. Pleadings of the State 166. While the State did not refer to the alleged violation of Article 22(1) of the Convention, alleged by the representatives, it pointed out that there have been “security councils” constantly at the office of the Mayor of Mapiripán with the aim of addressing the public order situation and analyzing the problem of forced displacement and taking steps to address this phenomenon. Furthermore, the “Local Contingency Plan for Prevention of Displacement of the Population by Violence” was adopted, as a set of programs, tools and actions that seek to attenuate and/or address the basic needs of the displaced population.