100. In its consistent case law on cases of forced disappearance of persons, the inter-American system for protection of human rights has reiterated that it constitutes an illegal act that gives rise to a multiple and continuing violation of several rights protected by the American Convention and places the victim in a state of complete defenselessness, giving rise to other related crimes. The international liability of the State is exacerbated when the disappearance is part of a systematic pattern or practice implemented or tolerated by its authorities. It amounts, in short, to a crime against humanity, entailing a crass departure from the core principles upon which the inter-American system is founded.92. 101. Among the distinctive characteristics of disappearance are the means used to carry it out, which are designed to conceal any evidence of the facts, the corresponding responsibility, and the fate of the victim. That applies to the instant case in which the authorities repeatedly denied the detention of Mr. Vásquez Durand. Another feature is the manner in which the failure to elucidate the facts and identify those responsible affects not only the direct victim, but also their family and society in general.93 102. When a state ratifies the Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearance of Persons it undertakes “[n]ot to practice, permit, or tolerate the forced disappearance of persons, even in states of emergency or suspension of individual guarantees,” in accordance with Article I (a) of that instrument. The Commission notes that even though the facts of the instant case occurred prior to ratification of the aforementioned Convention by Ecuador, given the ongoing or permanent nature of the crime of forced disappearance, its effects are prolonged over time until the fate or whereabouts of the victim is ascertained, so that the State is in a situation of ongoing violation of its international obligations.94 103. The Commission has adopted an integral approach to this human rights violation, understanding it as a continuing violation. This approach enables it to analyze and determine the full extent of the State’s responsibility. It should be borne in mind that so long as the whereabouts of the victim are not determined or their remains located, the family and the rest of society must endure the experience of a forced disappearance with all the attendant consequences.95 104. The Inter-American Court has stated that in cases of forced disappearance it is unnecessary to perform a detailed analysis of the detention in relation to each of the guarantees recognized in Article 7 of the American Convention. In the opinion of the Inter-American Court, when it is demonstrated that deprivation of freedom was a step prior to achieving the disappearance of the victims, it is not necessary to determine whether or not the alleged victims were informed of the reasons for their detention; whether or not said detention was effected regardless of the motives and conditions established in the legislation in force at the time of the events; or whether the acts of the detention were unreasonable, unpredictable or disproportionate.96 The reason for the above is that when examining an alleged forced disappearance it should be taken into account that the deprivation of liberty of the individual is just the beginning of the 92 IACHR, Report No. 101/01, Case 10.247 et al, Extrajudicial Executions and Forced Disappearances, Peru, October 11, 2001, paragraph 178. Available at www.cidh.oas.org/annualrep/2001sp/Peru10247.htm. 93 IACHR, Application to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in the Case of Narciso González Medina et al. (Case 11.324) v. Dominican Republic, May 2, 2010, paragraphs 106 and 107 and IACHR, Application to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in the Case of Gregoria Herminia Contreras et al. (Cases 12.494, 12.517, and 12.518,) v. Republic of El Salvador, June 28, 2010, paragraphs 134 and 135. Documents posted at: www.cidh.oas.org/demandas/demandasESP2010.htm. 94 IACHR, Application to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in the Case of Rainer Ibsen Cárdenas and José Luís Ibsen Peña (Case 12.529) v. Republic of Bolivia, May 12, 2009, paragraph 15, posted at: www.cidh.oas.org/demandas/demandasESP2009.htm. 95 IACHR, Application to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in the Case of Narciso González Medina et al. (Case 11.324) v. Dominican Republic, May 2, 2010, paragraphs 106 and 107 and IACHR, Application to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in the Case of Gregoria Herminia Contreras et al. (Cases 12.494, 12.517, and 12.518,) v. Republic of El Salvador, June 28, 2010, paragraphs 134 and 135. Documents posted at: www.cidh.oas.org/demandas/demandasESP2010.htm. 96 I/A Court H.R., Case of La Cantuta v. Peru. Judgment of November 29, 2006. Series C No. 162, paragraph 109. 24