13 corresponding legal framework, taking into account the body of evidence and the arguments submitted during the proceedings.25 35. Lastly, pursuant to the Court’s case law, the statement made by presumed victim cannot be assessed in isolation, but only within the whole body of evidence, insofar as it may provide further information on the presumed violations and their consequences.26 VI FACTS 36. In this chapter, the Court will establish the facts of this case based on the factual framework submitted to its consideration by the Commission, taking into account the body of evidence in the case, and the arguments of the representatives and the State. To this end, the facts will be examined under the following headings: (a) the Industrial Communities in Peru; (b) background information, functions and responsibilities of Mr. Lagos del Campo as a labor leader; (c) the dismissal of Mr. Lagos del Campo and the applicable legal framework; (d) the judicial actions filed by Mr. Lagos del Campo, and (e) his situation following his dismissal. A. The Industrial Communities in Peru 37. The concept of the Industrial Community was incorporated into the laws of Peru on July 27, 1970, the date on which the General Industries Act was promulgated (Decree-Law 18350).27 Article 23 of this law establishes that the Industrial Community was a legal entity created within an industrial company as the representative of all its permanent workers, and its purposes were established in Decree-Law 18384.28 38. In February 1977, the Industrial Community Act was promulgated (“Decree-Law 21789”) amending the previous law.29 According to the act, “[t]he Industrial Community of an industrial company in the reformed private sector is composed of all its permanent workers, who participate in its ownership, management and profits.”30 It was constituted as a private legal entity, and its purposes were: (a) to contribute to the establishment of constructive forms of interrelationship in the industrial company; (b) to strengthen the company by the united action of its members in the management and productive process, and their participation in the ownership of the Cf. Case of the “White Van” (Paniagua Morales et al.) v. Guatemala. Merits. Judgment of March 8, 1998. Series C No. 37, para. 76, and Case of Tenorio Roca et al. v. Peru, supra para. 45. 25 Cf. Case of Loayza Tamayo v. Peru. Merits. Judgment of September 17, 1997. Series C No. 33, para. 43, and Case of Favela Nova Brasilia v. Brazil. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of February 16, 2017. Series C No. 333, para. 98. 26 President of the Republic of Peru. Decree-Law 18350 General Industries Act. July 7, 1970. May be consulted at: http://peru.justia.com/federales/decretos-leyes/18350-jul-27-1970/gdoc/ 27 Purposes: (a) strengthening the industrial company by worker participation in management, productive process, ownership and reinvestment; (b) incorporation of the workers into the management of the industrial company to protect their rights and interests; (c) administration of acquired rights to the benefit of the workers, and (d) promotion of the social, cultural, professional and technical development of the workers. President of the Republic of Peru. Decree-Law 18384 General Industries Act. September 1, 1970. Art. 3. May be consulted at: http://docs.peru.justia.com/federales/decretos-leyes/18384-sep-1-1970.pdf 28 Cf. President of the Republic of Peru. Decree-Law 21789. Industrial Community Act. February 1, 1977. May be consulted at: http: //www4.Congress.gob.pe/ntley/imagenes/Lawes/21789.pdf (evidence file, annex 1 to the Merits Report, ff. 5 bis to 14 bis). 29 Article 1 of the Decree-Law in force at the time of the facts establishes: “Article 1. The Industrial Community of an industrial company of the reformed private sector is composed of all its permanent workers, who participate in its ownership, management and profits. The Industrial Community is a private legal entity and is governed by the provisions of this Act and any others that may be applicable.” 30