33 Court observes that the representatives did not alleged such breach, instead it was not until their final arguments that they referred to it. Hence the Tribunal deems that it is extemporaneous, and breaches the guarantees of defense, adversarial principle and good faith in the procedure of the parties. 125 * * * 121. In conclusion, the Court deems that the State is responsible for the forced disappearance of Florencio Chitay, given that he was deprived of his liberty in an illegal manner by agents of the State or private citizens with the acquiescence of the State, and to this date his whereabouts remain unknown. The foregoing took place in a systematic context of selective forced disappearances in Guatemala, directed, among others, against indigenous leaders, with the objective of dismantling all forms of political representation through the terror and thus shattering the popular participation that was contrary to the State policy. Specifically, the modus operandi and the subsequent concealment of his whereabouts to which Mr. Chitay Nech was subjected, reflects the deliberate intention to remove him form the legal sphere and to impede the exercise of both his civil and political rights. The aggravated situation, to which he was subjected, undoubtedly caused him feelings of anguish, fear and defenselessness that implied the violation of his right to humane treatment and to life. Consequently, the Court finds that the State is responsible for the violation of the rights established in the Articles 7(1) (Right to Personal Liberty), 5(1) and 5(2) (Right to Personal Integrity), 4(1) (Right to Life), 3 (Right to Juridical Personality), and 23(1) (Right to Participate in Government) of the American Convention, in relation with Article 1(1) (Obligation to Respect Rights) of the same, in relation with Article I(a) of the ICFDP, to the detriment of Florencio Chitay Nech, for his forced disappearance. IX FORCED DISPLACEMENT (ARTICLE 22), RIGHTS OF THE FAMILY (ARTICLE 17) AND CHILDREN (ARTICLE 19), IN RELATION TO ARTICLE 1(1) OF THE AMERICAN CONVENTION 122. In the present Chapter, the Court shall analyze the alleged violation to the protection of the family and the child, acknowledged in Articles 22, 17, and 19 of the American Convention. 1. Context and background 123. The displacement of the indigenous Mayan population during the internal armed conflict in Guatemala, as well as the terror and uprooting, have been documented in various reports. In this sense, the report, Guatemala, Memories of the Silence, pointed out that: The States Parties may establish mitigating circumstances for persons who have participated in acts constituting forced disappearance when they help to cause the victim to reappear alive or provide information that sheds light on the forced disappearance of a person. 125 Cf. Case of la Masacre of Pueblo Bello V. Colombia, supra note 94, para. 225, and Case Perozo et. al. V. Venezuela. Preliminary Exceptions, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of 28 of January of 2009. Series C No. 195, para. 290.