17 before, Mr. Anzualdo Castro had expressed his concern about it in the offices of APRODEH.48 47. The Court also notes that the disappearance of Kenneth Ney Anzualdo Castro clearly followed the modus operandi of the practice of forced disappearances of the time, in particular the ones perpetrated against university students. 48. This practice constituted, according to the report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (hereinafter, “CVR”), one of the steps in the procedure used as part of the counter-subversion plan implemented systematically by state agents between 1988 and 1993, in great part of the national territory and that became more important when the Executive power decided that the Armed Forced would replace the Police Forces in the internal control and combat of subversion. The members of the Armed Forces are held responsible for most of the victims of this practice49. The general profile of the victims of forced disappearances at the hands of state agents is groups of relatively younger and more educated people than the rest of the community,50 especially in comparison to the victims attributed to Sendero Luminoso. Moreover, even though the peasants constitute the larger group among the victims of forced disappearance, this practice was proportionally most used against university students.51 The Court notes that the CVR called upon the father of Kenneth Anzualdo to declare and he rendered a statement at a hearing together with the parents of another two disappeared persons, given the fact that they are cases that represent what happened to a great number of students.52 49. The modus operandi used in the forced disappearances had the following characteristics or stages: “selection of the victim, arrest of the individual, holding the victim at a detention site, possible transfer to another detention center, interrogation, torture and processing of the information obtained, the decision to eliminate the victim, the physical elimination, the concealment of the victims’ remains [and] the use of the State’s resources.”53 The common denominator throughout the entire process would have been “the denial of the very fact of the arrest and the withholding of any information whatsoever about what was happening to the person under arrest.” Consequently, the person would be entering an established circuit of clandestine detention, from which he or she would be very 48 Cf. statement of Ruben Dario Trujillo Mejia before the Office of the Fifth Provincial Prosecutor for Criminal Matters of Callao, of January 24, 1994 (record of evidence, volume V, appendix 11 to the application, pages 1740-1742); affidavit of Javier Roca Obregón, of March 16, 2009 (record of evidence, volume XI, pages 4363- 4367) and statement rendered by Félix Vicente Anzualdo Vicuña at the public hearing held before the Inter-American Court on April 2, 2009. 49 Cf. Final Report of the CVR, 2003, volume VI, chapter 1.2 Forced Disappearance of people by state agents, pages 79-81, available at http://www.cverdad.org.pe/ifinal/index.php 50 Final Report of the CVR, 2003, volume VI, chapter 1.2 Forced Disappearance of people by state agents, pages 84-85, available at http://www.cverdad.org.pe/ifinal/index.php 51 Cf. Final Report of the CVR, 2003, volume VI, chapter 1.2 Forced Disappearance of people by state agents, pages 103, available at http://www.cverdad.org.pe/ifinal/index.php. See also, Case of Castillo Páez V. Perú. Merits. Judgment of November 3, 1997. Series C No. 34, para. 42. 52 CVR, public hearings in Lima, Case 26, Fourth Sessions, June 22, 2002 (record of evidence, volume VIII, appendix 11 to the brief of pleadings and motions, page 2755). 53 Final Report of the CVR, 2003, volume VI, chapter 1.2 Forced Disappearance of people by state agents, pages 84, available at http://www.cverdad.org.pe/ifinal/index.php