5 status, for which reason the violation of his right to personal integrity should be assessed according to the most stringent standards. 26. As regards the brothers’ next of kin, in the case of Igmar Alexander, the petitioners identify the following as victims of violation of the right to respect for psychological and moral integrity: his mother, María Magdalena Mejías Camero; his father, Ignacio Landaeta Muñoz; his partner, Francy Yelut Parra Guzmán; his daughter, Johanyelis Alejandra Landaeta Guzmán; and his sisters, Victoria Eneri Landaeta Galindo and Leydis Rossiman Landaeta Galindo. They add that since the events, the family have been suffering from feelings of anguish and grief at the killing of Igmar Alexander; his absence as a father, partner, son, and brother; and the failure to clarify the facts and punish those responsible . In relation to Eduardo José, the petitioners name his mother, María Magdalena Mejías Camero, and his father, Ignacio Landaeta Muñoz. They add that following the death of Eduardo José, the family had been overwhelmed with grief and sorrow. They say that his mother, Mrs. María Magdalena Mejías, is still traumatized and has difficulty organizing her ideas, a condition made worse by her presence at the exhumation of her son's body, on which day she had a profound nervous crisis. They also mention that Eduardo José's father, Mr. Ignacio Landaeta, lost his job and has been unable to find steady work owing to the absences caused by his ongoing activity in the criminal inquiry. The petitioners also say that the Mr. Ignacio Landaeta’s economic circumstances have “taken a dramatic turn for the worse as he has invested what few savings he had in judicial proceedings and the upkeep of his home.” In general terms, they say that the impunity in which the crimes have remained has been a source of frustration and sorrow for the parents of the brothers. 27. In addition to the violation of the duty to ensure the substantive rights described, owing to the lack of investigation of the facts and punishment of those responsible, the petitioners claim infringement of the rights to a fair trial and judicial protection (Articles 8 and 25 of the Convention). They argue a lack of due diligence in the investigation and violation of the reasonable-time principle in the proceedings over the deaths of the two brothers. 28. Specifically with respect to the proceeding opened after the death of Igmar Alexander Landaeta Mejías, the petitioners claim that the investigation had a series of flaws, such as, in the reconstruction of the events, for instance. They also draw attention to the inaction of the authorities when it came to carrying out the necessary tests to ascertain the facts and determine the respective penalties. In addition, they note that there was excessive delay in the investigation, bearing in mind that it lasted 7 years and that approximately 12 years after the events the facts have not been adequately clarified nor has it been established who was responsible. Regarding the delay, they say that there were no complexities at all in the case as the identity of the culprits had been known from the outset; that the next of kin had made numerous efforts to give momentum to the investigation; that the judicial authorities had typically been negligent in pursuing the necessary inquiries; and that it was clear that the impunity in which the case has remained adversely affected the next of kin of Igmar Alexander. The petitioners further state that the next of kin have not had recourse to an effective judicial remedy, given the incomplete and deficient collection of evidence, the unwarranted delay in the proceeding, and the neglect and abandonment of the case file. 29. As to the proceedings surrounding the killing of Eduardo José Landaeta Mejías, the petitioners say that despite the fact that years have gone by, no one has been brought to trial nor have the circumstances in which the facts occurred been made clear. In similar fashion to the case of Igmar Alexander, the petitioners say that the delays have been unwarranted as there were no difficulties in the case, given that the prosecutors knew the names of the officers involved and yet they failed, for instance, to carry out the necessary tests to determine the weapon that the 15 shots came from or their trajectory. According to them, therefore, the delay has been caused not by the complexity of the case but by the omissions and negligence of the judicial operators. They say that the parents of Eduardo José have acted in a way designed to move the investigation forward through requests for the taking of evidence, requests for the case file to be located when it was lost, and their presence throughout the proceedings to prevent any hindrances in the investigation. They also say that the negligence of the authorities is self-evident given that they announced the death of Eduardo José based solely on the account provided by the law