36 additional source of suffering and anguish for the victims and their next of kin131. The Court has verified all the activities carried out by the next-of-kin in the event of the disappearance of Mr. Anzualdo Castro before different institutions and state agencies to determine his whereabouts (supra paras. 70 and 71) as well as to prompt the investigations (infra paras. 127 to 154). The delay in the investigations, which were also incomplete and ineffective (infra para. 156 and 157) has exacerbated the next of kin's feelings of impotence. The Court recalls that in other cases, the continued deprivation of the truth regarding the fate of a disappeared person constitutes cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment against close next of kin.132 It is clear, for this Tribunal, the connection of the next-of-kin's suffering with the violation of the right to truth (infra paras. 118 to 120, 168 and 169), which enlightened the complexity of the forced disappearance and the multiple effects it produced. 114. The facts of the instant case allow to conclude that the violation of the personal integrity of Mr. Anzualdo Castro’s next-of-kin flows from the situations and circumstances they had to go through, before, during and after said disappearance, as well as from the general context in which the events occurred. The next of kin present physical and mental sequels of the facts described above and the events have made an impact on their social and work relations and altered their families' dynamics. These situations, fully understood in the complexity of the forced disappearance, will persist for as long as some of the verified factors of impunity prevail.133 As a result, the State is responsible for the violation of the right to humane treatment of Félix Vicente Anzualdo Vicuña, Iris Isabel Castro Cachay de Anzualdo, Marly Arleny Anzualdo Castro and Rommel Darwin Anzualdo Castro, embodied in Article 5(1) and 5(2) of the Convention, in connection with Article 1(1) thereof. VII ON THE RIGHT TO ACCESS TO JUSTICE AND THE OBLIGATION TO CONDUCT EFFECTIVE INVESTIGATIONS (ARTICLES S 8(1) (RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL)134 AND 25(1) (RIGHT TO JUDICIAL PROTECTION)135 IN CONJUNCTION WITH ARTICLES 1(1) (OBLIGATION TO RESPECT RIGHTS) AND 2 (DOMESTIC LEGAL EFFECTS)136 131 Cf. Case of Blake V. Guatemala. Merits, supra note 42, para. 114; Case of Heliodoro Portugal V. Panamá, supra note 58, para. 174; and Case of La Cantuta V. Perú, supra note 58, para. 125. 132 Cf. Case of Trujillo Oroza V. Bolivia. Reparations and Costs. Judgment of February 27, 2002. Series C No. 92, para. 114; Case of La Cantuta V. Peru,, supra note 58, para. 125; and Case of Goiburú et al. V. Paraguay, supra note 59, para. 101. 133 Cf. Case of Goiburú et al. V. Paraguay, supra note 59, para. 103; and Case of La Cantuta V. Perú, supra note 58, para. 126. 134 Article 8(1) 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. 135 Article 25(1) 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. 136 Article 2 Where the exercise of any of the rights or freedoms referred to in Article 1 is not already ensured by