56 123. Through the request for provisional measures submitted by the Commission on February 5, 1998, the Court learned that Mr. Oscar Vásquez’s death is the subject of a proceeding currently before the Inter-American Commission. This information is consistent with the fact that the Commission did not include that act in the application on which the instant Case is based. For this reason, the Court concludes that it may rule only on the facts concerning Mr. Oscar Vásquez’s arrest, but not on his death. 124. The Court has not found sufficient evidence to link to the present process the circumstances surrounding the death of Mr. Carlos Morán-Amaya who, according to the Commission, was Judge Trejo-Duque’s assistant and was involved in the investigation of the “white van case.” The Court also notes that Mr. Morán-Amaya was not included as a victim in the Commission’s petition. 125. With regard to Mr. José Alvino Grijalva-Estévez and Mr. Alvaro González-Tepaz, although they were included in the police report as victims of the crimes allegedly committed by the Treasury Police, the Commission did not include their names among the victims in the application. XIII VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 5 126. In the brief containing its application, the Commission claimed that the State violated the right to humane treatment and requested that the Court find that Guatemala violated [this right] enshrined in Article 5 of the American Convention and the obligations established in Articles 1, 6 and 8 of the Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture, to the detriment of: Ana Elizabeth Paniagua-Morales; Julián Salomón Gómez-Ayala; William Otilio González-Rivera; Pablo Corado-Barrientos; Manuel de Jesús González-López; Augusto Angárita-Ramírez, Doris Torres-Gil; José Antonio Montenegro; Oscar Vásquez and Marco Antonio Montes-Letona. The Commission declared that the victims were cruelly treated by members of the Treasury Police and that they were violently beaten and subjected to threats of all kinds, this being the case both for those victims who survived their captivity and those who lost their lives and whose bodies bore signs of torture and mutilation. The Commission further stated that the risk of torture is particularly high when a person is unlawfully and clandestinely detained. It concluded by asserting that the State did not investigate the torture inflicted on the victims as it is required to do by Article 8 of the Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture. 127. In answer to the application, Guatemala denied that it violated the right to physical integrity of the persons named in the preceding paragraph, there being nothing to imply any intentionality on the part of the State in this regard and repeated that all the State’s actions were geared to clarifying the facts and punishing those responsible. 128. In its brief of final arguments the Commission stated that ten victims in this case were captured and detained by State agents. It claimed that the ill-treatment of Ms. Paniagua-Morales, Mr. Gómez-Ayala, Mr. González-Rivera, Mr. Corado-Barrientos and Mr. González-López was deliberate, a fact confirmed by the condition of their bodies. The Commission pointed out that Mr. Angárita-Ramírez, Ms. Doris Torres-Gil, Mr. Montenegro, Mr. Vásquez and Mr. Montes-Letona had testified to the then Judge in the case, Mr. Julio Aníbal Trejo-Duque, that they had been subjected to torture or cruel or inhuman treatment at the Treasury Police premises.