the American Convention, in relation to Articles 1(1), 2 and 24 of this instrument and Article 7 of the Convention of Belém do Pará. It indicated that it respected and ensured the right to honor and dignity, freedom of expression, freedom of thought, opinion and information, freedom of movement, and equality before the law, because these are established in domestic law pursuant to the American Convention. 141. In particular, the State asserted that domestic law established a legal framework that protected and guaranteed the life of women, their holistic development, and their participation at all levels of the country, as well as regulating the application of measures of protection, punishment, comprehensive care, and prevention of violence and discrimination against women. The State explained that it had created various institution with the purpose of preventing and punishing the perpetration of crimes against women. In the specific case of Claudina Velásquez, it denied that there had been a lack of due diligence to address a case of gender-based violence, underscoring that its officials acted in keeping with the legal framework in force at the time of the facts. It asserted “that there [was] no document in the proceedings that records [the] fact” that the presumed victim was subject to stereotyping during the investigation and that, at no time, had there been discrimination against the Velásquez Paiz family for reasons of race, beliefs, sex, religion or any other attribute of their personalities. The State argued that, regardless of the shortcomings or the way in which the crime scene was handled, the State’s position had never been designed to discriminate against the victim or her family. It indicated that, even though there could have been errors in the autopsy that was performed, actions were taken to determine whether the presumed victim had been raped and, in this regard, vaginal and anal swabs were taken, which established the presence of semen. In addition, it indicated that “there was no action protocol, or order or procedure,” in which State officials had indicated any discriminatory opinion of Claudina Velásquez owing to her manner of dress, or her appearance, condition, situation, status or the place where she was found, and that there had never been any attempt to transfer the blame of what happened to the presumed victim. It also argued that the investigation was headed by the Public Prosecution Service, to which the Police are subordinated, so that any opinion issued by a police agent “was made personally, and did not affect the investigation.” 2. The exercise of the right provided for in the foregoing paragraph shall not be subject to prior censorship but shall be subject to subsequent imposition of liability, which shall be expressly established by law to the extent necessary to ensure: (a) respect for the rights or reputations of others; or (b) the protection of national security, public order, or public health or morals. 3. The right of expression may not be restricted by indirect methods or means, such as the abuse of government or private controls over newsprint, radio broadcasting frequencies, or equipment used in the dissemination of information, or by any other means tending to impede the communication and circulation of ideas and opinions. 4. Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph 2 above, public entertainments may be subject by law to prior censorship for the sole purpose of regulating access to them for the moral protection of childhood and adolescence. 5. Any propaganda for war and any advocacy of national, racial, or religious hatred that constitute incitements to lawless violence or to any other similar action against any person or group of persons on any grounds including those of race, color, religion, language, or national origin shall be considered as offenses punishable by law. 220 Article 22 of the American Convention establishes: “1. Every person lawfully in the territory of a State Party has the right to move about in it, and to reside in it subject to the provisions of the law. 2. Every person has the right to leave any country freely, including his own. 3. The exercise of the foregoing rights may be restricted only pursuant to a law to the extent necessary in a democratic society to prevent crime or to protect national security, public safety, public order, public morals, public health, or the rights or freedoms of others. 4. The exercise of the rights recognized in paragraph 1 may also be restricted by law in designated zones for reasons of public interest. 5. No one can be expelled from the territory of the state of which he is a national or be deprived of the right to enter it. 6. An alien lawfully in the territory of a State Party to this Convention may be expelled from it only pursuant to a decision reached in accordance with law. 7. Every person has the right to seek and be granted asylum in a foreign territory, in accordance with the legislation of the state and international conventions, in the event he is being pursued for political offenses or related common crimes. 8. In no case may an alien be deported or returned to a country, regardless of whether or not it is his country of origin, if in that country his right to life or personal freedom is in danger of being violated because of his race, nationality, religion, social status, or political opinions. 9. The collective expulsion of aliens is prohibited.” 51