50 right.221 This freedom also supposes that each individual may determine, without any coercion whatsoever, whether he or she wishes to form part of the association.222 In addition, the State has the obligation to guarantee that everyone can exercise freely their freedom of association without fear that they will be subject to any kind of violence because, to the contrary, the ability of groups of people to organize themselves to protect their interests could be reduced. 223 In this regard, the Court has stressed labor-related freedom of association “is not exhausted with the theoretical recognition of the right to constitute (unions), but also includes, inseparably, the right to exercise this freedom.”224 157. In this regard, the Court finds that the protection of the right to labor-related freedom of association is subsumed not only in the protection of labor unions, their members and their representatives. Indeed, unions and their representatives enjoy specific protection for the proper performance of their functions because, as the Court has established in its case law 225 and as can be observed in different international instruments,226 including Article 8 of the Protocol of San Salvador, freedom of association in union matters is extremely important to defend the legitimate interests of the workers and is included in the human rights corpus juris.227 Moreover, the importance that States have recognized to union rights is reflected in the fact that Article 19 of the Protocol of San Salvador gives the Court competence to rule on violations of the State obligation to allow labor unions, federations and confederations to function freely.228 158. However, the protection recognized to the right to freedom of association in the context of labor extends to organizations that, even though their nature differs from that of labor unions, seek to represent the legitimate interests of workers. This protection is derived from Article 16 of the American Convention, which protects freedom of association for any purpose, as well as from other international instruments that recognize special protection to freedom of association to protect the interests of workers, without specifying that this protection is restricted to the labor union sphere.229 Thus Article 26 of the American Convention, which relates to the economic, social, educational, scientific and cultural standards set forth in the Charter of the Organization of American States, recognizes the right of employers and workers to associate freely for the defense and promotion of their interests. Additionally, the Preamble to the Inter-American Democratic Charter recognizes that the right of workers to associate themselves freely for the defense and promotion of their interests is fundamental to the achievement of democratic ideals. 159. These principles concur with the protection recognized by the ILO, which has clarified that the expression “workers’ representatives” includes those recognized as such under domestic law or practice, whether union representatives or “elected representatives, namely, representatives 221 Cf. Case of Baena Ricardo et al. v. Panama. Merits, reparations and costs, supra, para. 156. 222 Cf. Case of Baena Ricardo et al. v. Panama. Merits, reparations and costs, supra, para. 158. Cf. Case of Huilca Tecse v. Peru, supra, para. 77, and Case of Cantoral Huamaní and García Santa Cruz v. Peru. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of July 10, 2007. Series C No. 167, para. 146. 223 224 Cf. Case of Huilca Tecse v. Peru, supra, para. 70. Cf. Case of Baena Ricardo et al. v. Panama. Merits, supra, para. 156, and Case of Cantoral Huamaní and García Santa Cruz v. Peru, supra, paras. 144 to 146. 225 Cf. ILO. Convention No. 87 Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organize, of June 17, 1948 and Convention No. 98 Right to Organize and Collective Bargaining, of June 8, 1949. 226 227 Cf. Case of Baena Ricardo et al. v. Panama. Merits, supra, para. 158. Cf. Protocol of San Salvador, Article 19(6); Entitlement of Legal Entities to Hold Rights under the Inter-American Human Rights System (Interpretation and scope of Article 1.2, in relation to Articles 1(1) , 8, 11(2), 13, 16, 21, 24, 25, 29, 30, 44, 46, and 62(3) of the American Convention on Human Rights, and of Article 8(1) A and B of the Protocol of San Salvador). Advisory Opinion OC-22/16 of February 26, 2016. Series A No. 22, para. 87, and Case of Huilca Tecse v. Peru, supra, para. 74. 228 Cf. American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man, Article XXII; Charter of the Organization of American States, Article 45(c); Inter-American Democratic Charter, Preamble, and ILO Convention on workers’ representatives, supra, Article 3(b). 229