205. Furthermore, the Commission observes that defenders play an essential role in ensuring the balance between environmental protection and the development of the countries of the region. 288 They are also vital to guaranteeing that every individual’s right to life and right to personal integrity are protected from exposure to contaminating agents that, emanating from a variety of sources, can affect the quality of the air, water, soil and subsoil, and can be inimical to the enjoyment of human rights. 289 206. The IACHR finds that in this case, the State failed to ensure Carlos Escaleras Mejía’s right to associate freely in that it conducted no serious and effective investigation into the facts related to his murder in order to identify those responsible, including state agents. As occurred in the analysis on the right to life, the lack of follow-up to the lines of investigation related his human rights defense work through the organizations to which he belonged, which in turn involved state agents, has an impact on the analysis of the State’s responsibility as regards the right to freedom of association. 207. In addition, the Commission understands that the organized work of human rights defenders is an essential component in constructing a solid and lasting democracy, in fully assuring the rule of law, and in upholding the fundamental guarantees of all persons.290 Accordingly, the Commission notes that the death of Carlos Escaleras Mejía had a direct chilling effect on the vindication of rights and the reporting of violations.291 As reported by the petitioners, COPA was seriously weakened following Mr. Escaleras’s death. 208. In light of the above considerations, the Commission concludes that the State did violate the right to associate freely enshrined in Article 16.1 of the American Convention, in conjunction with the obligations established in Article 1.1 thereof, with respect to Carlos Escaleras Mejía. 3.2. Political rights 209. Article 23.1.b of the American Convention establishes the right of people “to be elected in genuine periodic elections.” The Court has said that in addition to entailing the right to be elected, this also implies “the right to have a real opportunity to serve in the position to which [a person] was elected.”292 In particular, the right to participate in government specifically implies that citizens not only have the right, but also the opportunity, to participate in the conduct of public affairs. 293 Accordingly, the State is responsible for adopting effective measures to ensure the conditions necessary for the full enjoyment of that right.294 210. As determined in the established facts, Mr. Carlos Escaleras Mejía was elected as his party’s candidate for the Tocoa mayoral election, which was to be held in November 1997. Mr. Escaleras was murdered approximately one month before the election took place. Moreover, the IACHR notes that in the weeks prior to his killing, Mr. Escaleras was pressured to withdraw his candidacy, threatened, and even offered money in exchange for declining to fight the election. The Commission observes that the established 288 Principle 3 of the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development reads as follows: “The right to development must be fulfilled so as to equitably meet developmental and environmental needs of present and future generations.” 289 IACHR, Second Report on the Situation of Human Rights Defenders in the Americas, December 31, 2011, para. 311. Available at: http://www.oas.org/es/cidh/defensores/docs/pdf/defensores2011.pdf. 290 IACHR, Report No. 120/10, Case 12.605, Merits, Joe Luis Castillo González (Venezuela), October 22, 2010, para. 109. 291 IACHR, Report on the Situation of Human Rights Defenders in the Americas, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.124 doc. 5 rev. 1, March 7, 2006, para. 141. In addition, see: I/A Court H. R., Case of Huilca Tecse v. Peru, Merits, Reparations, and Costs, Judgment of March 3, 2005, Series C No. 121. 292 I/A Court H. R., Case of Luna López v. Honduras, Merits, Reparations, and Costs, Judgment of October 10, 2013, Series C No. 269, para. 142. 293 I/A Court H. R., Case of Luna López v. Honduras, Merits, Reparations, and Costs, Judgment of October 10, 2013, Series C No. 269, para. 142; Case of Chitay Nech et al. v. Guatemala, Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs, Judgment of May 25, 2010, Series C No. 212, para. 107. 294 I/A Court H. R., Case of Yatama v. Nicaragua, Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs, Judgment of September 23, 2005, Series C No. 127, para. 201. 40