21 disappearance of María and Josefa Tiu Tojín was part of a pattern of massive and systematic violations to human rights committed during the internal armed conflict in detriment of some groups or sectors of the population in Guatemala (supra paras. 48 and 49). As such, the forced disappearance of María and Josefa Tiu Tojín have particular consequences with regard to the obligation to guarantee the human rights protected under the American Convention (infra para. 91). 54. In view of the previous considerations, based on the facts established (supra paras. 40 to 51) and in the terms of the acknowledgment of international responsibility made by the State, it is correct to state that the latter is responsible for the violation of the rights enshrined in Articles 4(1), 5(1) and 5(2), 7(1), 7(2), 7(4), 7(5) and 7(6), 8(1), and 25(1) of the American Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) of the same treaty and Article I of the Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearances, in detriment of María Tiu Tojín; for the violation of the rights enshrined in Articles 4(1), 5(1) and 5(2), 7(1) and 7(2), 8(1), and 25(1) of the American Convention, in relation to Articles 1(1) and 19 of the same treaty and Article I of the Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearances, in detriment of the child Josefa Tiu Tojín; for the violation of the right foreseen in Article 5(1) of the Convention in relation to Article 1(1) of the same, in detriment of Victoria Tiu Tojín, sister and aunt of the victims, and for the violation of the rights enshrined in Articles 8(1) and 25(1) of the American Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) of the same, in detriment of the next of kin of María and Josefa Tiu Tojín, specifically: Josefa Tiu Imul, mother of María Tiu Tojín, Rosa Tiu Tojín, Pedro Tiu Tojín, Manuel Tiu Tojín, and Juana Tiu Tojín, siblings of María Tiu Tojín. The State’s international responsibility is considered aggravated, pursuant with that established in this chapter (supra para. 53). VII REPARATIONS (APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 63(1) OF THE AMERICAN CONVENTION) 55. It is a principle of international law that any violation of an international obligation that has caused damage entails the obligation to repair it adequately.71 The Court has adopted decisions in this regard based on Article 63(1) of the American Convention.72 56. Within the framework of the acknowledgment made by the State (supra paras. 12, 14, and 16), the considerations on the acknowledgment of international responsibility, and the violations to the American Convention declared in the previous 71 Cfr. Case of Velásquez Rodríguez. Reparations and Costs. Judgment of July 21, 1989. Series C No. 7, para. 25; Case of Heliodoro Portugal v. Panamá, supra note 17, para. 217; and Case of Bayarri v. Argentina, supra note 17, para. 119. 72 Article 63(1) of the Convention states that: If the Court finds that there has been a violation of a right or freedom protected by this Convention, the Court shall rule that the injured party be ensured the enjoyment of his right or freedom that was violated. It shall also rule, if appropriate, that the consequences of the measure or situation that constituted the breach of such right or freedom be remedied and that fair compensation be paid to the injured party.