6 of the cas d’espèce to this Court with greater precision and detail were precisely the representatives of the victims themselves and their next of kin (through their common intervener), as subjects of International Law that they are, and not the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. The application presented by the latter includes some imprecisions pointed out throughout the present Judgment of the Court, and several of the facts only appear in the Annexes to the application presented by the Commission. But the Annexes are part of the main document, the mentioned application. 22. In my judgment, the present case buries, once and for all, the anachronistic and paternalistic view of the past of the alleged need of an “intermediation” by the Commission between the victims and the Court. In the present case, the victims – the real substantive plaintiff before the Court, as I have always stated – know how to present the facts in a much more complete and ordered form than the Commission. The present case puts in evidence the emancipation of the human being vis-à-vis their own State, as well as vis-à-vis the Commission, within the framework of the Inter-American System of protection. 23. Once more the cas d'espèce highlights the true central position that victims occupy in the legal proceedings before the Court. In the public hearing of 06.2627.2006 before this Court in the present case of the Castro Castro Prison, in response to questions I allowed myself to direct to her (reminding her that the victims themselves has vindicated “reparation measures of a collective impact”), the Commission admitted correctly that the victims are the real plaintiff before he Court (thesis I have backed for years in the bosom of this Tribunal) and that the measures of reparation of “collective impact” were necessary and important in the circumstances of the present case, in which the next of kin of the male and female prisoners were also direct victims of “psychological infringement” of the tortures inflicted upon their loved ones deprived of freedom. 17 24. In its Brief of Pleadings, Motions, and Evidence of 12.10.2005, presented to the Inter-American Court in the cas d'espèce, the legal representation of the victims and their next of kin stated that pavilion 1A of the Prison of Castro Castro “held approximately 131 female prisoners among which there were women who were far along in their pregnancies and elderly women.” They were attacked at dawn of May 06, 1992 by 500 police officers and around 1000 officers of the armed forces, with the use of heavy weapons; at noon they used “white phosphorous gas against the female prisoners locked up in pavilion 1A,” which caused “violent asphyxia” and “a excruciating suffering: the feeling that their windpipe would split in half and that the respiratory tract was chemically burning; the skin and internal organs were burning as if they would have caught fire. (…) The explosives caused expansive waves that damaged the kettledrums which felt like they were on fire." (para. 20) 25. According to the mentioned account, “the massive nature of said infliction of suffering undergone by the victims during the attack, turned said suffering more extreme and horrific in nature." (para. 23) Likewise, "several women who were seriously injured but who were able to resist and arrive alive at the hospital, where they were took in trucks, one on top of the other, were raped at the hospital by hooded individuals who were supposedly going to examine them upon their arrival. They were not offered any medical attention and some of them died as a consequence of that. The male survivors were forced to remain almost 15 days without medical attention submitted to forced positions, of ventral cubitus with their hands on their 17 . Cf. IACHR, Transcription of the Public Hearing..., op. cit. supra n. (9), pp. 143-144 (internal circulation).