8 44. In the following paragraphs, the IACHR will pronounce on the context for the allegations articulated by the parties, the specific facts that have been established and the consequent international responsibility of the Peruvian State. Before pronouncing on the established facts, however, the IACHR deems it relevant to refer to the historical context alleged by the parties and the behavior of the main actors in the armed conflict that took place in Peru in the 1980s and 1990s. B. Previous considerations – the use of indiscriminate violence by insurgent groups and extralegal actions by the security forces 45. In its chapter on “armed actors” the Final Report of the TRC asserted that in May 1980, the leadership of the self-named Communist Party of Peru – Sendero Luminoso put into effect its plan to bring down the representative-democratic system of government and impose its own ideal of political and 5 social organization in Peru. The annihilation of community leaders, and local authorities; the personality cult of founder Abimael Guzmán Reinoso, the elimination of peasant communities that did not support the organization, the deliberate use of terror and other actions in violation of International Humanitarian Law 6 were some of the tactics employed by Sendero Luminoso in its effort to build a “new State.” According to the TRC, the violent acts attributed or claimed by that group left more than 31,000 people dead—which amounts to 54% of the fatal victims of the armed conflict—, displaced tens of thousands more, and 7 caused a prolonged state of despair among the Peruvian population. 46. From the inception of its “revolutionary war of the people” in 1984, the Túpac Amaru Revolutionary Movement (MRTA) contributed to the insecurity in Peru and for violations of the basic rights of thousands of Peruvian men and women. The most prominent criminal activities attributed to or claimed by the MRTA include assaults on financial institutions; attacks on business establishments; attacks on police posts and on the residences of government officials; selective killings of government officials; kidnappings of businessmen and high-level government officials and diplomats; the execution of indigenous leaders and some killings motivated by the sexual orientation or gender identity of the 8 victims. 47. In its Second Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Peru, the IACHR stressed that acts of violence promoted by Sendero Luminoso and the MRTA “led to the loss of life and property (…), in addition to the pain and suffering caused by the permanent state of anxiety to which Peruvian society, in 9 general, was subjected.” …continuation 2006. Series C, No. 147; Case of Gómez Palomino, Judgment of November 22, 2005. Series C, No. 136, and Case of De la Cruz Flores, Judgment of November 18, 2004. Series C, No. 115. This report was also submitted by the petitioners in the instant case. 5 Final Report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, 2003, Volume II, Chapter 1, Armed Actors, 1.1 The Communist Party of Peru – Sendero Luminoso, pp. 29 and 30, available at: www.cverdad.org.pe/ifinal/index.php. 6 Final Report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, 2003, Volume I, Chapter 1, The periods of violence, p. 54; Chapter 3, Faces and profiles of the violence, pp. 168 and 169, Volume II, Chapter 1, Armed actors, 1.1 The Communist Party of Peru- Sendero Luminoso, p 128; and Volume VI, Chapter 1, Patterns in the commission of human rights violations and crimes, 1.1 Assassinations and massacres, p. 16, available at: www.cverdad.org.pe/ifinal/index.php. 7 Final Report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, 2003, Volume II, Chapter 1, Armed Actors, 1.1 The Communist Party of Peru- Sendero Luminoso, pp. 13, 127 – 130, available at: www.cverdad.org.pe/ifinal/index.php. The following position is found in a 1991 document titled Sobre las dos colinas: guerra antisubversiva y sus aliados, believed to have been written by Abimael Guzmán Reinoso: “Our point of departure is that we do not ascribe to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, nor to that of Costa Rica […]. We reject and condemn human rights because they are bourgeois, reactionary and counter-revolutionary rights; today they are the weapon of revisionists and imperialists, and mostly of Yankee imperialism.” In this regard, see Amnesty International, Human Rights in a Time of Impunity, May 1996. Section 4, Abuses by the Armed Opposition, available at: http://asiapacific.amnesty.org/library/Index/ESLAMR460011996?open&of=ESL-325. 8 Final Report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, 2003, Volume II, Chapter 1, Armed actors, 1.4 The Movimiento Revolucionario Túpac Amaru, pp 387, 389, 392, 431, 432 and 433, available at: www.cverdad.org.pe/ifinal/index.php. 9 IACHR, Second Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Peru, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.106, Doc. 59 rev., June 2, 2000, Introduction, B. Frame of Reference, para. 7, available at: www.cidh.oas.org/countryrep/Peru2000sp/indice.htm.