statements by victims with physical disabilities, it is hard for them to get to the health centers, which are far from where they live. 289. Finally, as regards the components of habilitation and rehabilitation, the IACHR notes that the States should adopt the measures necessary for the inclusion of persons with disabilities in community life, work life, and social life. The United Nations Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities has indicated that under the CRPD the states have the obligation to support persons with disabilities to seek, obtain, and maintain employment.379 Along the same lines, Article 28(2)(c) of the CRPD establishes that the States shall take steps to “ensure access by persons with disabilities and their families living in situations of poverty to assistance from the State with disability-related expenses, including adequate training, counselling, financial assistance and respite care.” 290. According to the statements by the victims who have a disability in the instant case, they are unemployed, and the State has not adopted any inclusive measure to create a favorable and propitious environment for them to get work. In addition, the State has not adopted measures to provide integral protection to these persons. 291. In view of the considerations noted, the Commission considers that the State had a reinforced duty to protect the rights to humane treatment and the economic and social rights indicated above, in relation to Article 1(1) of the same instrument, in relation to the surviving victims who have disabilities. D. Rights to a fair trial and to judicial protection (Article 8(1)380 and Article 25(1) 381 of the American Convention, in relation to articles 1(1) and 2 of the same instrument) 292. The Commission has underscored that the obligation of the states to act with due diligence includes facilitating access to suitable and effective judicial remedies in the face of a violation of human rights.382 In addition, the Commission has established that Article 25 of the American Convention is directly related to Article 8(1), which enshrines the right of every person to be heard with the proper guarantees and within a reasonable time383 and confers on the victims’ family members the right to reparation for the harm suffered due to the death of their loved ones.384 The Court has indicated that the ability to access justice should ensure, in a reasonable time, the right of the alleged victims or their family members to have everything possible done to learn the truth of what happened and to punish those responsible. 385 293. The organs of the inter-American system have highlighted the importance of carrying out an exhaustive, serious, and impartial investigation, at the initiative of the authorities, immediately, in response to human rights violations.386 Along the same lines, the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights has indicated, regarding human rights violations in the context of business activities: “States parties must provide United Nations, Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. A.F. v. Italy. Communication No. 9/2012, May 19, 2015, para. 8.3. Article 8(1) of the American Convention: Every person has the right to a hearing, with due guarantees and within a reasonable time, by a competent, independent, and impartial tribunal, previously established by law, in the substantiation of any accusation of a criminal nature made against him or for the determination of his rights and obligations of a civil, labor, fiscal, or any other nature. 381 Article 25(1) of the American Convention: Everyone has the right to simple and prompt recourse, or any other effective recourse, to a competent court or tribunal for protection against acts that violate his fundamental rights recognized by the constitution or laws of the state concerned or by this Convention, even though such violation may have been committed by persons acting in the course of their official duties. 382 IACHR, Access to Justice for Women Victims of Violence in the Americas, OEA/Ser. L/V/II. doc. 68, January 20, 2007. 383 IACHR. Report No. 26/09. Case 12,440. Wallace de Almeida. Brazil. March 20, 2009, para. 119. 384 IACHR, Report No. 52/16. Merits. María Laura Órdenes Guerra et al. Chile. November 30, 2016, para. 105; IACHR. Report No. 62/01, Case 11,564, Riofrío Massacre, Colombia, April 6, 2001, para. 44. 385 See I/A Court HR. Case of the Miguel Castro Castro Prison v. Peru. Judgment of November 25, 2006. Series C No. 160, para. 382, citing Case of Vargas Areco; I/A Court HR. Case of the Ituango Massacres v. Colombia. Judgment of July 1, 2006. Series C No. 148, para. 289; and I/A Court HR. Case of the Pueblo Bello Massacre v. Colombia. Judgment of January 31, 2006. Series C No. 140, para. 171. 386 I/A Court HR. Case of Godínez Cruz v. Honduras. Judgment of January 20, 1989. Series C No. 5, para. 188; I/A Court HR, Case of Velásquez Rodríguez. Judgment of July 29, 1988. Series C No. 4, para. 177; I/A Court HR, Case of the “Street Children” (Villagrán Morales et al.). Judgment of November 19, 1999. Series C No. 63, para. 226. 379 380 53