44 such as that of the present case, in which there has been a context of violence characterized by extrajudicial killings and impunity, becomes the State’s duty to stop the conditions that allow the repeated occurrence of the arbitrary deprivations of life and their lack of investigation. 109. In the present case, it has been proven that the State did not adopt the measures necessary to change the context of violence against children and youngsters, framework within which Marco Antonio Servellón García, Rony Alexis Betancourth Vásquez, Orlando Álvarez Ríos, and Diomedes Obed García Sánchez were killed. This makes the State’s international responsibility worse. * * * 110. The mentioned context was marked by the stigmatization of the youngsters as the alleged responsible parties for the increase in public insecurity in Honduras and by the identification, as young delinquents, of the children and youngsters in situations of social risk, that is, poor, in situations of vagrancy, without stable employment or that suffer from other social problems (supra para. 79(1)). 111. Regarding that link between poverty and violence directed to children and youngsters, the Special Rapporteur of the United Nations for Extrajudicial, Summary, or Arbitrary Killings, stated in her report of June 14, 2003 regarding Honduras, that “[e]ven though children are vulnerable and they are exposed to abuses and to crime due to lack of autonomy, juvenile delinquency can never be used to justify the killing of children by security forces in order to maintain public order.”71 112. The Court warns that, in attention to the principle of equality and nondiscrimination, the State cannot allow that its agents, nor can it promote in the society practices that reproduce the stigma that poor children and youngsters are conditioned to delinquency, or necessarily related to the increase in public insecurity. That stigmatization creates a climate propitious so that those minors in risky situations are constantly facing the threat that their lives and freedom be illegally restrained. 113. The previous is especially serious in the present case, since Marco Antonio Servellón García and Rony Alexis Betancourth Vásquez were juveniles. In Advisory Opinion No. 17 on the Juridical Condition and Human Rights of the Child, the Court stated that the cases in which the victims of violations to human rights are boys and girls, who also have special rights derived from their condition, and these are accompanied by specific duties of the family, society, and the State, are especially gross.72 The Tribunal understands that the due protection of children’s’ rights must take into consideration the characteristics of children themselves and the need to 71 Cfr. Civil and political rights, specifically the matters related with the disappearances and summary killings. Extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary killings. Report of the Special Rapporteur, Mrs. Asma Jahangir, presented in compliance of decision 2002/36 of the Human Rights Commission. Addition. Mission to Honduras. E/CN.4/2003/3/Add.2. of June 14, 2002. 72 Cfr. Juridical Condition and Human Rights of the Child. Advisory Opinion OC-17/02 of August 28, 2002. Series A No. 17, para. 54. Cfr. also, Case of the Ituango Massacres, supra note 3, para. 244; Case of the “Mapiripán Massacre”, supra note 9, para. 152; and Case of the girls Yean and Bosico. Judgment of September 8, 2005. Series No C 130, para. 33.