55 contrary: there was evidence to show that when members of the Treasury Police officiated in Guatemala, they did so in uniform." The State claimed that the weapons used by the Treasury Police did not correspond to those used in the murders of the aforesaid victims, adding that, however, the State of Guatemala cannot come before this Honorable Court to affirm or deny whether any agent could have been involved: it would be absurd to deny it when an entire police investigation conducted by a State investigation body, which is deserving of the State’s respect, upholds this hypothesis and when, moreover, an Attorney-General’s office accuses them, not to mention the State’s efforts, which will continue until it finds the perpetrators. How could the State of Guatemala then deny it? But how can it affirm it if the presumption of innocence exists as long as there is no conviction? This hypothesis is not excluded and is one which, with the greatest procedural honesty, the State of Guatemala has raised before this Honorable Court in the light of the State’s own investigations. 118. Article 4(1) of the American Convention establishes that e]very person has the right to have his life respected. This right shall be protected by law and, in general, from the moment of conception. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his life. 119. The Court now turns to the examination of the cases in which the Commission claims that the State violated the right to life enshrined in Article 4 of the American Convention. 120. The Court has deemed it proven that it was members of the Treasury Police who deprived the following persons of their liberty: Mr. Gómez-Ayala (supra, paras. 89 (d) (1) and 93), Ms. Paniagua-Morales (supra, paras. 89 (d) (3) and 93), Mr. González-Rivera (supra, paras. 89 (d) (4) and 93), Mr. Corado-Barrientos (supra, paras. 89 (d) (4) and 93) and Mr. González-López (supra, paras. 89 (d) (5) and 93). This proof leads the Court to conclude that it was those agents who deprived these victims of their lives and that their deaths are therefore imputable to the State. 121. In the case of Mr. Erik Leonardo Chinchilla, the Court does not find any connection with members of the Treasury Police, and although the police investigation mentions an accident in which bodyguards of the Director of the National Police were allegedly involved, there is no evidence that it was they who killed him. Furthermore, Mr. Chinchilla was not arrested and he was shot to death, a different modus operandi that what was used in the other cases. The Court has studied the paragraph of an Americas Watch publication (Closing the Space; Human Rights in Guatemala, May 1987 - October 1988; an Americas Watch Report; November 1988) which claimed that the murderers were driving a white "van", but no such evidence has been submitted to the Court. The finding is that in that case there was insufficient evidence to impute responsibility for Mr. Chinchilla’s death to the State. 122. Consequently, the Court declares that Guatemala violated Article 4(1) of the American Convention to the detriment of Ms. Ana Elizabeth Paniagua-Morales, Mr. Julián Salomón Gómez-Ayala, Mr. William Otilio González-Rivera, Mr. Pablo CoradoBarrientos and Mr. Manuel de Jesús González-López. * * * CONCERNING MR. OSCAR VÁSQUEZ, MR. CARLOS MORÁN-AMAYA, MR. JOSÉ ALVINO GRIJALVA-ESTÉVEZ AND MR. ALVARO GONZÁLEZ-TEPAZ