requesting certain procedures to be carried out and conveying their needs to the Public Prosecutor’s Office. B.- Considerations of the Court 215. The Court must determine whether the State has violated the rights recognized in Articles 8(1) 251 and 25(1)252 of the Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) of said instrument, and shall therefore examine the different investigations and domestic criminal proceedings opened in this case, which allegedly violated the right to judicial guarantees and protection. B.1. Investigation and process related to the execution of Néstor José Uzcátegui a.- Investigation procedures 216. In this case, and particularly taking into account the fact that on January 2, 2001, the Second Prosecutor of the State of Falcón ordered an investigation to be opened regarding the events that led to the death of Néstor José Uzcátegui and that as of the rendering of this Judgment, there has been no clarification of what happened, nor have those responsible for the facts been punished, the Court concludes, with respect to this matter, that there are elements that indicate a lack due diligence. 217. In the first place, the Court finds that this process did not fully comply with several international standards253 in respect of the forensic evaluation. This situation was noted by several prosecutors who participated in the investigation.254 In particular, the Court notes that: i) no photographs were taken of Néstor José Uzcátegui’s body or of the bullet holes or bloodstains at the scene of the incident; ii) there are no X-rays of the body; iii) no photographs were taken of the victim’s clothing, no information about his clothing was recorded and no clothes were gathered; iv) no expert assessment was carried out to determine whether there was gunshot residue on Nestor Uzcátegui’s hands, a procedure that would have been crucial to know whether he fired the weapon, as suggested in the testimonies of the police officers at the scene 255; v) there is no 251 Article 8(1) of the American Convention states: “Every person has the right to a hearing, with due guarantees and within a reasonable time, by a competent, independent, and impartial tribunal, previously established by law, in the substantiation of any accusation of a criminal nature made against him or for the determination of his rights and obligations of a civil, labor, fiscal, or any other nature.” 252 Article 25(1) of the American Convention states: “Everyone has the right to simple and prompt recourse, or any other effective recourse, to a competent court or tribunal for protection against acts that violate his fundamental rights recognized by the constitution or laws of the state concerned or by this Convention, even though such violation may have been committed by persons acting in the course of their official duties.” 253 Cf. Case González et al. (“Cotton Field”) v. Mexico. Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of November 16, 2009. Series C No. 205, para. 305. See also United Nations, Manual on the effective prevention and investigation of extralegal, arbitrary and summary executions, E/ST/CSDHA/.12. Also see Report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on the obligation of States to investigate serious violations of human rights, and the use of forensic genetics, July 4, 2011, A/HRC/18/25. 254 Cf. Brief of April 17, 2001, addressed to Assistant Prosecutor of the Criminal Circuit Court of the State of Falcón signed by Attorney Aníbal Eduardo Lossada Lossada, First Prosecutor of the Public Prosecutor’s Office of the Criminal Circuit Court of the State of Falcón. This prosecutor sent an official letter to the Assistant of the Senior Prosecutor of the same Circuit expressing his dissatisfaction with the investigation and indicating its serious shortcomings (Evidence file, volume 21, page 6683, and volume 1, page 337). 255 Cf. Testimony rendered by Espartaco Martínez before the Court during the public hearing held on November 28, 2011. See also expert report rendered by Freddy Armando Pecerreli Monterroso by affidavit on November 18, 2011 (Evidence file, volume 17, page 5571). 54