38 or representatives may invoke different rights from those included in the application filed by the Commission, based on the facts alleged therein.155 In this case, the Court notes that given that the arguments raised by the representatives regarding the violation of Article 5(1) of the American Convention to the detriment of the next of kin of Blanca Jeannette Kawas-Fernández are based on facts contained in the application, the Court will proceed to consider such arguments. 128. On several occasions,156 the Inter-American Court has declared the violation of the right to humane treatment in respect of the next of kin of victims of certain human rights violations or with respect to other persons having close relationships with such victims. In this connection, in the Case of Valle-Jaramillo et al. v. Colombia, the Court held that a violation of the right to mental and moral integrity of the direct next of kin of victims of certain human rights violations may be declared by applying a rebuttable presumption with regard to mothers and fathers, daughters and sons, husbands and wives, permanent companions (hereinafter “direct next of kin”) provided it responds to the specific circumstances of the case. With regard to such direct next of kin, it is for the State to rebut said presumption.157 129. In all other cases, the Court must analyze if the evidence in the records of the case shows a violation of the right to humane treatment of the alleged victim, regardless of whether he/she is a next of kin of another victim in the case or not. As regards those persons in respect of whom the Court does not presume that the right to humane treatment has been violated because they are not direct next of kin, the Court must assess, for example, whether there is a particularly close relationship between them and the victims in the case that would enable the Court to find that the right to humane treatment has been violated. The Court may also assess whether the alleged victims have been actively involved in seeking justice in the specific case,158 or whether they have suffered as a result of the facts of the case or of subsequent acts or omissions on the part of the State authorities in relation to the incidents.159 130. The Court notes that the representatives have requested that the State be found responsible for the violation of Articles 5(1) and 5(2) of the American Convention to the detriment of the following direct next of kin of Blanca Jeannette Kawas-Fernández: Mr. Jacobo Kawas-Kury, father;160 Blanca Fernández, mother;161 Selsa Damaris Watt-Kawas, 155 Cf. Case of “Five Pensioners” V. Perú. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of February 28, 2003. Series C No. 98, para. 155; Case of Ríos et al. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs, supra note 10, para. 42; and Case of Perozo et al. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs, supra note 10, para. 32. 156 Cf. Case of Blake V. Guatemala. Merits. Judgment of January 24, 1998. Series C No. 36, para. 114; Case of Heliodoro-Portugal. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs, supra note 123, para. 163; Case of Valle-Jaramillo et al. v. Colombia. Merits, Reparations, and Costs, supra note 8, para. 119. 157 Cf. Case of Valle-Jaramillo et al. V. Colombia. Merits, Reparations, and Costs, supra note 8, para. 119. 158 Cf. Case of Bámaca-Velásquez V. Guatemala. Merits. Judgment of November 25, 2000. Series C No. 70, para. 163; Case of Heliodoro-Portugal. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs, supra note 123, para. 163, and Case of Valle-Jaramillo et al. V. Colombia. Merits, Reparations, and Costs, supra note 8, para. 119. 159 Cf. Case of Blake. Merits, supra note 156, para. 114; Case of Heliodoro-Portugal. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs, supra note 123, para. 163; and Case of Valle-Jaramillo et al. Merits, Reparations and Costs, supra note 8, para. 119. 160 Cf. Birth certificate of Blanca Jeannette Kawas-Fernández, supra note 145. 161 Cf. Birth certificate of Blanca Jeannette Kawas-Fernández, supra note 145.