186. The Commission considers that due to these multiple denials, a human potential has inevitably been destroyed, ambitions have been dashed, entire lives have been shattered, not only for the individuals, but also for the Dioulas as a community within the big Ivorian community. This has obviously led to an incalculable loss of a life plan, an accumulated loss of generation to generation over the decades. The Commission concludes on a serious violation of the right to development under the provisions of Article 22 of the Charter. Violation of Article 1 187. The provisions of Article 1 of the Charter provides for an obligation to implement all the necessary measures with the effect of giving meaning to the substantial rights guaranteed by the Charter. With regard to these provisions, it follows that the liability is only invoked when a substantial right has been violated. Furthermore, this liability is automatically invoked as soon as a violation of a right protected by the Charter is deemed to have occurred.65 As a result of all the foregoing, the Commission concludes that the provisions of Article 1 have been violated. Petitions of the Complainant 188. The issue of grounds and additional petitions has been resolved above. The consideration was extended to the end of the exchanges and submissions on the merits. Having said that, and in accordance with the constant jurisprudence of the Commission, the measures taken by the State after the referral of the matter in order to remedy violations do not absolve it of its liability under the Charter.66 The violations observed and perpetrated must be redressed, more so when the said violations are continuous even if they are not actively continued by the current Government of the Respondent State which deserves credit for acting in good faith to take measures to end the suffering and indignity the victims are enduring. 189. Having taken into account the reforms carried out by the State after the referral of the matter, the Commission will consider the petitions of the Complainant on the basis of the outcome of the said reforms. Consequently, the Commission will consider the amended petitions of the Complainant as follows. See, among others, Association des Victimes des Violences Post-Electorales and Interight v. Cameroon Communication 272/03 (2009) AHRLR 47 (ACHPR 2009) para 105-115 ; Jawara para 46. 66 See, for example, Civil Liberties Organisation v. Nigeria Communication 129/94 (2000) RADH 190 (CADHP 1995) para 17. 65 61