45 expressed feelings of uncertainty, anxiety, and frustration before the alleged delay and inefficiency of the State institutions in this regard.163 133. Consequently, the Tribunal considers that the State violated the right to humane treatment [personal integrity] established in Articles 5(1) and 5(2) of the American Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) of that instrument, to the detriment of Martha Castro Mendoza, Tito Ibsen Castro, Rebeca Ibsen Castro, and Raquel Ibsen Castro, for the forced disappearances to which Rainer Ibsen Cardenas and Jose Luis Ibsen Peña were subjected. * * * 134. As to the allegations of the representatives regarding the alleged threats and acts of harassment suffered by the Ibsen family, as well as the injury that Mr. Tito Ibsen Castro allegedly sustained during his childhood, the Tribunal reiterates what it has established in its jurisprudence, to the effect that “the alleged victim, his next of kin, or his representatives may invoke rights other than those asserted in the Commission’s application on the basis of the facts presented by the latter.”164 The Court notes that the alleged facts are not within the factual framework brought before the Tribunal by the InterAmerican Commission and are not supervening, nor do they explain, clarify, or dismiss the facts that have been mentioned in the application.165 Therefore, the Court shall not rule on those events. VII RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL [JUDICIAL GUARANTEES] AND JUDICIAL PROTECTION (ARTICLES 8 AND 25 OF THE AMERICAN CONVENTION, IN RELATION TO ARTICLES 1(1) AND 2 THEREOF, AND ARTICLES III AND IV OF THE CONVENTION ON FORCED DISAPPEARANCE) 135. The Inter-American Commission referred to a variety of facts on which it based its argument that the right to due process has been allegedly violated in the instant case. In general, the Commission indicated, that: the criminal proceeding was not conducted within a reasonable time; “the Ibsen family had the right to count on an investigation into what happened to the victims by [...] a criminal court, that would reflect suitability guarantees to conduct of the proceedings"; the State did not initiate an investigation ex officio in the detention and subsequent disappearance of Messrs. Rainer Ibsen Cárdenas and José Luis 163 In relation with the mentioned procedures, Mrs. Rebeca Ibsen Castro mentioned that “she tried through all possible human means to find out something about the truth and their whereabouths, the criminal proceeding only delayed the mourning, the uncertainty and the verification of the perpetrators[,] as 'the dictatorship spoiled individuals', they committed such unimaginable bloodshed, humiliation and tortures [...]." Declaration rendered before public notary (affidavit) by Mrs. Rebeca Ibsen Castro (case file on the merits, volume III, folio 740). In the same token, at the public hearing held in the present case (supra para. 8), Mr. Tito Ibsen described the answer of the state authorities to the procedures undertaken by the Ibsen Family as “world record in justice denial.” He mentioned that, to his family, the last four decades have been “an endless search of knocking doors that were always closed, bearing permanent and constant anxiety, [… which have even caused] [the] family unit to fracture […]”. 164 Cf. Case of the “Five Pensioners” v. Peru. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of February 28, 2003. Series C No. 98. para. 155; Case of the “Las Dos Erres” Massacre v. Guatemala, supra note 7, para. 161, and Case of Chitay Nech et al. v. Guatemala, supra note 6, para. 33. 165 Cf. Case of Usón Ramírez v. Venezuela. Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations and Costs, Judgment of November 20, 2009. Series C No. 207, para. 102.