39 2. The civilian population as such, as well as individual civilians, shall not be the object of attack. Acts or threats of violence the primary purpose of which is to spread terror among the civilian population are prohibited. 3. Civilians shall enjoy the protection afforded by this Part, unless and for such time as they take 156 a direct part in hostilities. 199. Furthermore, the United Nations Security Council expressed concern in its resolutions 1261 (1999) and 1325 (2000) “that civilians, particularly women and children, account for the vast majority of those adversely affected by armed conflict, including as refugees and internally displaced persons, and increasingly are 157 targeted by combatants and armed elements…” 200. The Commission finds that in the instant case the right to life was violated of Francisco Hilario Torres; his wife, Dionicia Quispe Malqui; their daughters, Antonia and Magdalena Hilario Quispe; their daughter-inlaw, Mercedes Carhuapoma de la Cruz; Ramón Hilario Morán and his wife, Dionicia Guillén; and Elihoref Huamaní Vergara, as well as of the children: Yessenia, Miriam and Edith Osnayo Hilario; Wilmer Hilario Carhuapoma; Alex Jorge Hilario; and the brothers Raúl and Héctor Hilario Guillén, since it may be reasonably infer from all the evidence, including Viviano Hilario Mancha´s testimony before the Prosecutors Office of July 12, 1991, in which he stated he saw the half-buried corpse of his grandson along with others who could not recognize, and from the report of the Truth and Reconciliation Committee that the members of the Escorpio military patrol killed the victims and later blew up their corpses with dynamite. The Commission notes that 20 years after the events occurred, the remains found at Misteriosa mine have still not been identified or delivered to their relatives. 201. Based on the foregoing, the Commission finds that there is sufficient evidence in the instant case to conclude that Peru is responsible for violation of Articles 7, 5, and 4 of the American Convention in conjunction with Article 1(1) thereof, to the detriment of the 15 victims in the case. 202. As regards the right to recognition of juridical personality, the Commission recalls that this right is an essential and necessary prerequisite in order to hold and exercise all rights, since without it, a person does 158 not enjoy the protection and guarantees that the law offers, simply because they are invisible to it. 203. By its very nature, forced disappearance of persons seeks the juridical annulment of the individual precisely in order to remove them from the protection that the laws and justice afford them. Thus, the apparatus of repression ensures that persons may be deprived of their rights with impunity by placing them beyond the reach of any possible judicial protection. The aim of those who perpetrate forced disappearance is to operate outside the law and conceal any evidence of crime, thereby seeking to avert its investigation and punishment, and prevent the person or their next-of-kin from filing suit or, in the event suit is filed, from 159 accomplishing a positive result. 204. In this connection, in various instances in the past the Inter-American Commission has consistently held that a person who has been detained and disappeared is “necessarily placed outside of and excluded from the juridical and institutional order of the State, which ha[s] the effect of denying recognition of 156 Colombia ratified Protocol II Additional to the Geneva Conventions on August 14, 1995. http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/protocol2.htm. Available at: 157 United Nations, Security Council, S/RES/1325 (2000) of 31 October 2000. 158 IACHR, Report No. 95/09, Cases 12.494, 12.517, 12.518, Gregoria Herminia et al., El Salvador, September 8, 2009, 159 IACHR, Report No. 95/09, Cases 12.494, 12.517, 12.518, Gregoria Herminia et al., El Salvador, September 8, 2009, par. 207. par. 208.