B. Considerations of the Court B.1. The obligation to respect and guarantee the rights to life and to personal integrity and measures of protection for children 187. In light of the arguments of the parties, the Court will now examine the alleged international responsibility of Colombia for the presumed violation of the rights to life, personal integrity and measures of protection for children in relation to the obligations of respect and guarantee.252 The Court finds it pertinent to make a joint analysis of these alleged violations owing to the complex nature of the circumstances inherent in the events that occurred in this case, which reveals interrelated effects on different rights and prevents a fragmented analysis. Similarly, since the events occurred in the context of a non-international armed conflict, as already mentioned (supra paras.21 and ff.), as it has on other occasions,253 the Court considers it useful and appropriate to interpret the scope of the treaty-based norms and obligations in a way that complements the norms of international humanitarian law, based on their specificity in this matter,254 in particular the 1949 Geneva Conventions255 and, in particular, Article 3 common to the four conventions256 (hereinafter also “common Article 3”), the Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 and relating to the Protection of Victims of Non-International Armed Conflicts 252 Article 1(1) of the American Convention stipulates that “[t]he States Parties to this Convention undertake to respect the rights and freedoms recognized herein and to ensure to all persons subject to their jurisdiction the free and full exercise of those rights and freedoms, without any discrimination for reasons of race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, economic status, birth, or any other social condition.” 253 Cf. Case of the Ituango Massacres v. Colombia. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of July 1, 2006. Series C No. 148, para. 179; Case of the Mapiripán Massacre v. Colombia, paras. 114, 153 and 172, and Case of the Massacres of El Mozote and nearby places v. El Salvador, para. 141. 254 It should be recalled that international humanitarian law must be applied by the parties in the context of noninternational armed conflicts, provided that the facts correspond to situations that occur because of and during the conflict. See, in this regard, International Criminal Court, Pre-Trial Chamber, The Prosecutor v. Thomas Lubanga Dyilo, ICC-01/0401/06-803, decision confirming charges, of January 29, 2007, para. 287, and the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, The Prosecutor v. Tadiç (“Prijedor”), No. IT-94-1, Judgment on preliminary objections (competence) of October 2, 1995, para. 70. See also, in the case of Colombia, Supreme Court of Justice, Criminal Cassation Chamber, Justice and Peace Second Instance, decision of September 21, 2009, case file 32,022, Reporting Judge: Sigifredo Espinosa Pérez, pp. 186 and 187 of 229. In the instant case, the parties and the Commission agreed to consider that the Court should analyze the situation, interpreting the American Convention in light of the pertinent provisions of international humanitarian law. 255 See, in particular, Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, adopted on 12 August 1949 by the Diplomatic Conference for the Establishment of International Conventions for the Protection of Victims of War, held in Geneva from 21 April to 12 August, 1949. Entry into force: 21 October 1950, and ratified by Colombia on November 8, 1961. 256 Article 3 common to the 1949 Geneva Conventions establishes: “Non-international conflicts: In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each Party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions: 1. Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, colour, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria. To this end, the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the above-mentioned persons: (a) Violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture; (b) Taking of hostages; (c) Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment; (d) The passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples. 2. The wounded and sick shall be collected and cared for. An impartial humanitarian body, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross, may offer its services to the Parties to the conflict. The Parties to the conflict should further endeavour to bring into force, by means of special agreements, all or part of the other provisions of the present Convention. The application of the preceding provisions shall not affect the legal status of the Parties to the conflict.” ‐ 55 ‐