guarantee,111 and regarding the use of force,112 in order to rule on the alleged violation of the said rights. 78. Thus, the Court takes note of the different international instruments on this matter and, in particular, the Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials and the Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials113 (hereinafter “Principles on the Use of Force” and “Code of Conduct,” respectively). On this basis, it considers that, when analyzing the use of force by State agents, three fundamental moments must be considered:114 (a) preventive actions, (b) actions accompanying the events, and (c) actions subsequent to the events. 1. Preventive actions: legality and exceptionality of the use of force in relation to the obligation of guarantee 79. The facts of the case and the evidence provided in the proceedings before the Court reveal that, at the time of the events, Dominican Republic had no legislation establishing the parameters for the use of force by State agents. Thus, during the public hearing, the Court asked the State to forward the regulations on the use of force and firearms by the Police and the Army or whoever exercised functions of migratory control on the border, in addition to the action protocols and procedures for border incidents, and legally authorized equipment. The Court also asked the State to provide the rules together with information on the training and practices of the Dominican armed forces in relation to the use of force and firearms. 115 In this regard, the State forwarded some documents supposedly on the use of force and firearms, from which it cannot be inferred that there was an adequate regulatory framework on the issue at the time of the incident and even today. 116 80. This Court has previously established that the State has an obligation to adapt its domestic legislation and “to ensure that its security forces, which are entitled to use legitimate force, respect the right to life of those who are under its jurisdiction.”117 The State must be clear when defining domestic policies on the use of force and pursue strategies to implement the Principles on the Use of Force and the Code of Conduct.118 Thus, agents should be provided with different types of weapons, ammunition, and protective equipment that enable them to adapt the elements used in their reaction proportionately to the incidents in which they have to intervene, restricting the use of lethal weapons that can cause injury or death as much as possible.119 111 Cf. Case of the “Street Children” (Villagrán Morales et al.) v. Guatemala. Merits. Judgment of November 19, 1999. Series C No. 63, para. 144, and Case of Uzcátegui et al. v. Venezuela, supra, para. 132 112 Cf. Case of Zambrano Vélez et al. v. Ecuador. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of July 4, 2007. Series C No. 166, paras. 67 and ff., and Case of Uzcátegui et al. v. Venezuela, supra, para. 132. 113 Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials. Adopted by the eighth United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders held in La Havana, Cuba, from 17 August to 7 September 1990; Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials, approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations by Resolution 34/169, of 17 December 1979. 114 to 8. 115 Cf. Principles on the Use of Force. Principles No. 5, 6, 7, 11(f), 22 and 23, and Code of Conduct. Articles 1 Cf. Public hearing of this case held on June 21, 2012, supra. 116 Law creating the Code of Justice of the Armed Forces, No. 3483, published in the Gaceta Oficial of March 6, 1953 (file of annexes to the State’s final arguments, tome VII, folio 4054 to 4107) and Military Regulations of the Armed Forces (file of annexes to the State’s final arguments, tome VII, folio 3927 to 3954). 117 Cf. Case of Montero Aranguren et al. (Reten de Catia) v. Venezuela. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of July 5, 2006. Series C No. 150, para. 66, and Case of the Barrios Family v. Venezuela, supra, para. 49. 118 Cf. Case of Montero Aranguren et al., (Reten de Catia) v. Venezuela, supra, para. 75, and Case of the Barrios Family v. Venezuela, supra, para. 49. 119 Cf. Principles on the Use of Force, Principle No. 2. 26