46 Xitumul were included in the original petition but not included in the admissibility report; in the merits phase, however, sufficient information was provided to include them among the list of persons affected by the various events that have been part of the case from the outset. 2. Analysis of the facts through the prism of the American Convention and other applicable inter-American instruments 203. The present case involves multiple events of various kinds that occurred over the course of several years. The Commission’s analysis of the law will be done in the following order: 1) massacres, extrajudicial executions and torture; 2) forced disappearances; 3) rapes; 4) children who were victims of the violence; 5) violations related to these events; 6) judicial guarantees and judicial protection, and 7) the right to equal protection and non-discrimination. 2.1 Concerning the massacres, extrajudicial executions and torture (articles 4, 5 and 7 of the American Convention, read in conjunction with Article 1(1) thereof) 204. The Commission recalls that the right to life is the condition sine qua non for the enjoyment of all other human rights; failure to respect the right to life renders all other rights meaningless.294 Accordingly, observance of Article 4, read in conjunction with Article 1(1) of the American Convention, not only presupposes that no person shall be arbitrarily deprived of his or her life (negative obligation), but also requires that States take all necessary measures to protect and preserve the right to life (positive obligation), as part of their duty to ensure the free and full exercise of the Convention-protected rights to all persons subject to their jurisdiction.295 205. Important among these measures is the States’ obligation to i) create a legal framework that deters any possible threat to the right to life; ii) see that their security forces, which are entitled to use legitimate force, respect the right to life of the individuals under their jurisdiction; iii) establish an effective system of justice capable of investigating, punishing and redressing the deprivation of life by State officials or private individuals; and iv) ensure the right to unimpeded access to the conditions that 296 will guarantee a decent existence. 206. As for the practice of extrajudicial executions, the Court has written that: (…) the States must adopt the necessary measures not only to prevent and punish the deprivation of life as a consequence of criminal acts, but also to prevent arbitrary executions by 297 their own police force (…). 294 I/A Court H.R., Case of the “Street Children” (Villagrán Morales et al.) v. Guatemala. Merits. Judgment of November 19, 1999. Series C No. 63, par.144. 295 I/A Court H.R., Case of Zambrano Vélez et al. v. Ecuador. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of July 4, 2007. Series C No. 166, par.80; Case of the “Street Children” (Villagrán Morales et al.). Merits. Judgment of November 19, 1999. Series C No. 63, par.144. 296 I/A Court H.R., Case of Zambrano Vélez et al. v. Ecuador. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of July 4, 2007. Series C No. 166, par.81; Case of Montero Aranguren et al. (Detention Center of Catia). Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of July 5, 2006. Series C No. 150, par.66. 297 I/A Court H.R., Case of the Miguel Castro Castro Prison v. Peru. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of November 25, 2006. Series C No. 160, par.238; Case of the Mapiripán Massacre v. Colombia. Merits, Reparations and Costs.