82 Rodolfo Montiel Flores, who shall be considered beneficiaries of the reparations ordered by this Tribunal. 212. On the other hand, although the representatives submitted some evidence about the alleged damages suffered by the relatives of Messrs. Cabrera and Montiel as an alleged consequence of the violations declared, the Court notes that the Commission did not allege in its report on the merits or in its application that such individuals were victims of any violation of a right under the American Convention (supra para. 60). Based on the foregoing and considering the case law of the Tribunal,321 the Court does not considere that the next-of-kin of the victims in the case at hand are “injured parties”322 and it also determines that they will be beneficiaries of reparations only in the capacity as heirs, that is, if the victim dies and pursuant to the provisions of the domestic legislation. B) Obligation to investigate the facts, identify, prosecute and, if applicable, punish the responsible 213. The Commission and the representatives agreed on pointing out that “a comprehensive reparation requires that the Mexican State investigates with due diligence and in a serious, unbiased and exhaustive manner, the human rights violations suffered by Messrs. Cabrera and Montiel in order to clarify the historical truth of the facts, to prosecute and punish those who are not only materially but intellectually responsible.” Thus, they requested the Court to order the State “to locate, prosecute and punish all those who participated in the facts,” including all those responsible for the irregularities and omissions committed in the judicial proceeding. 214. The Court has established in this Judgment that the State has violated the rights to humane treatment [personal integrity] and personal liberty, fair trial [judicial guarantees] and judicial protection embodied in articles 5, 7, 8 and 25 of the American Convention, respectively (supra paras. 137, 177, 193, 201 and 204), as well as articles 1, 6 and 8 of the Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture. The Tribunal analyzed the way in which the regular tribunals evaluated the allegations of torture presented by the victims. However, the Court notes that the only judicial proceeding whose exclusive purpose was to investigate the reports on the alleged torture and cruel and inhuman treatment against Messrs. Cabrera and Montiel were conducted by the military criminal justice, which was not competent to hear this case (supra. para. 201). 215. Based on the foregoing, as ordered on other occasions,323 it is necessary that the abovementioned facts are effectively investigated by common bodies and jurisdiction in a proceeding conducted against the alleged perpetrators of the offenses committed against humane treatment. Consequently, the Court rules that the State shall effectively carry out the criminal investigation into the facts of the 321 Cf. Case of Acevedo Buendía et. al. (“Discharged and Retired Employees of the Comptroller”) v. Peru. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of July 1, 2009. Series C 198, para. 114. 322 As regards Mr. Montiel Flores, his wife, Mrs. Ubalda Cortés Salgado, and their children: Claudia, Andrés, María Magda Lizbeth, José Orvelín, Mareny and Leonor, all bearing the surname Montiel Cortés. As regards Mr. Cabrera García, his wife, Mrs. Ventura López Ramírez and his stepson, Miguel Olivar López. 323 Cf. Case of Velásquez Rodríguez v. Honduras. Merits, supra note 25, para. 174; Case of Fernandez Ortega et al v. Mexico, supra note 39, para. 228; and Case of Rosendo Cantú et al v. Mexico, supra note 30, para. 211.