30 108. In the present case, it is evident that the pattern of harassment against the population considered an “internal enemy” (supra paras. 64 and 93), conformed mostly of the Mayan people, was aimed at damaging not only the social foundations,111 but also their leaders, and social and political representatives. The motive within which the forced disappearance of Florencio Chitay Nech took place, as well as those of other members that exercised public charges, shows the clear intention of the State to dismantle all forms of political representation that threatened their “National Security Doctrine”(supra para. 64). 109. In that sense, the expert opinion of Mónica Pinto reveals that “[t]he implementation of the [D]octrine of [N]ational [S]ecurity had a specific expression in the policy of forced disappearances [, being] the indigenous leaders […] one of the most frequent targets of this policy.”112 Likewise, from the expert opinion rendered by Edgar Armando Gutiérrez Girón, it follows that “the different police and […] military bodies regularly persecuted [, among others,] political leaders.”113 110. In that extent, Florencio Chitay Nech, after being appointed as First Councilman and later designated Mayor of the Municipality, was subject to specific threats and was impeded from exercising his public functions in service of the community, after his formation and active participation as its leader.114 111. Likewise, the expert Rosalina Tuyuc, who made reference before the Court of the persecution that the indigenous leaders experienced in Guatemala during the internal armed conflict, expressed that: [F]or History, for tradition, for custom, for good faith, many of the leaders of [the] country are born, are formed and put their knowledge to the service of the community, every leader starts a process from the smallest charge to the highest charge, within it all the community leaders in [the] country were mainly target of the persecution of the army[. I]t was believed that as a consequence of the influence of the leaderships [,] the army mainly[,] saw them as a great threat because it saw the community work, the social work, the solidarity of the community, and this was seen as a problem of communism. [W]hen the communities saw how they lost their leader one after the other, their hope for development fled[. E]very leader meant a very deep loss and a grand step backwards for our villages because every leader that grows, […] grows due to his or her gift of service, gift of management, gift for hearing and orienting the community[. N]ot having a guide anymore is […] a moment of darkness, a leader was always a light, and when the light is not there anymore[,] the communities were essentially left in darkness without knowing what to do in search of solutions to the community problems. Historically, the official system was very racist, excluding the indigenous peoples, and when it comes to be that an indigenous person reaches a position of authority this also means that they are going to come and demand that problems be solved, and, that is why in many places in where there was indigenous corruption, it was also where there was more persecution. document by the independent expert on minority issues, Gay McDougall, on minorities and effective political participation. Forum on Minority Issues. Geneva, 12–13 November 2009, para. 1. 111 Cf. Case of la Masacre Plan of Sánchez V. Guatemala. Merits. Judgment of 29 of April of 2004. Series C No. 105, para. 42.7; Case Myrna Mack Chang V. Guatemala, supra note 12, para. 139, and Case of the Dos Erres Massacre v. Guatemala, supra note 12, para. 71. 112 Expert opinion of Mónica Pinto, supra note 48. 113 Expert opinion of Edgar Armando Gutiérrez Girón, supra note 52. 114 Cf. Statement of Luis Alfonso Cabrera Hidalgo, supra note 53; Statement of Julián Zet, supra note 56, f. 584, and Statement of Pablo Werner Ramírez Rivas, supra note 53.