287. The Court finds, therefore, that the dispute is not centered around necessity, proportionality and precaution in the use of force. Rather, in the case now before the Court, the relevant dispute, which will inevitably have an impact on the legal analysis to determine whether Article 4 of the American Convention has been violated, is to understand whether Eduardo Nicolás Cruz Sánchez, Herma Luz Meléndez Cueva and Víctor Salomón Peceros Pedraza died as a consequence of acts by agents of the state after they had gone out of combat and could therefore have been defined as hors de combat under the terms of international humanitarian law, or whether instead, they died while actively engaged in hostilities. This is why it is crucial in this case for the Court to learn whether Eduardo Nicolás Cruz Sánchez, Herma Luz Meléndez Cueva and Víctor Salomón Peceros Pedraza had ceased their participation in the hostilities at the time they were killed and thus had come under the protection of Common Article 3 of the four Geneva Conventions (supra paras. 276 to 278). This requires an examination of the relevant facts regarding each alleged victim and a determination, in each particular circumstance, of whether each one was actively involved in hostilities at the time of the facts.365 288. When the “Plan Nipón 96” was launched, the scenario of the operation was under the control of the MRTA, but once the operation had finished, the area was fully controlled by the State, specifically, the armed forces, police, and intelligence agents. The Court received several statements acknowledging the presence on the scene of people wearing ski masks and photographing and taping the events, who apparently belonged to the National Intelligence Service.366 In any case, it is important to clarify for the purposes of this international process that, as a consequence of the operation, the State unquestionably took full control of the ambassador’s residence. 289. The final concluding report on execution of “Plan Nipón 96” says that all the MRTA fighters died in the clash with security forces (supra para. 173). The commandos who took part in the operation also stated that they had not seen any MRTA member surrendering or being captured alive, nor had they witnessed extrajudicial executions.367 290. With respect to the positions of the bodies of MRTA members, the commandos’ statements assured that the bodies had not been moved inside the residence. 368 There is also the official record of the identification and removal of the bodies of the MRTA members, “Acta de identificación y levantamiento de cadáveres de los delincuentes terroristas pertenecientes al Movimiento Revolucionario ‘Túpac Amaru’ encontrados en la residencia del embajador de Cf. ICTY, Case of The Prosecutor v. Tadić (“Dule”), No. IT-94-1-T. Judgment of May 7, 1997, paras. 215 and 216. See also, ECtHR, TEDH, Korbely v. Hungary [GS], No. 9174/02. Judgment of September 19, 2008, paras. 90 and 91. 365 Cf., inter alia, statement by Infantry Colonel Gualberto Roger Zevallos Rodríguez, September 17, 2002 (evidence file, volume XXIII, further helpful evidence, folios 16047 to 16052); statement by Technician Three, Marine Roland Odon Llaulli Palacios, November 29, 2002 (evidence file, volume XXIII, further helpful evidence, folios 16607 to 16610); statement by Lieutenant Colonel of Communications Manuel Himeron Ramírez Ortiz, January 10, 2003 (evidence file, volume XXIII, further helpful evidence, folios 16808 to 16813); statement by Technician Two, Communications Operator Pedro Jaime Tolentino García, January 27, 2003 (evidence file, volume XXIV, further helpful evidence, folios 16837 to 16842), and ruling by the Third Special Criminal Chamber of the Superior Court of Lima, October 15, 2012 (evidence file, volume XX, annex to the representatives’ observations on the State’s preliminary objections, folios 13473 to 13476 and 130608). 366 Cf. Statements contained in the case file of the military courts (evidence file, further helpful evidence, volumes XXII to XXV). 367 Cf. Statements contained in the case file of the military courts (evidence file, further helpful evidence, volumes XXII to XXV). 368