76 legal, Arbitrary and Summary Executions” provides that effective protection must be ensured, by means of judicial or other remedies, to persons who are in danger of being executed in an extra-legal, arbitrary, or summary manner. 134. This phenomenon of extra-legal execution also involves “a disregard of the duty to organize the apparatus of the State in such a manner as to guarantee the rights recognized in the Convention,”151 by carrying out or tolerating actions directed toward effecting extra-legal executions, by not investigating them adequately, and by not punishing those responsible, if applicable, the State violates the duty to respect the rights recognized in the Convention and to ensure their free and full exercise,152 both by the alleged victim and by his next of kin, and for society as a whole to know what happened.153 135. On the other hand, it has been proven that, despite the various domestic recourses to clarify the facts, they were not effective to try and, if applicable, to punish those responsible (supra 70.21 to 70.38). The State has not identified any person or persons criminally responsible for the illegal acts referred to in the application. On the contrary, in the case under discussion it has been proven that the death of Juan Humberto Sánchez was set within the framework of a pattern of extra-legal executions (supra 70.1), one characteristic of which is that there has also been a situation of impunity (infra 143), in which judicial remedies are not effective, the judicial investigations have serious shortcomings, and the passing of time plays a fundamental role in erasing all traces of the crime, thus making the right to defense and judicial protection an illusion, as regards the terms set forth in Articles 8 and 25 of the American Convention. 136. For the aforementioned reasons, the Court finds that the State violated Articles 8 and 25 of the American Convention, in combination with Article 1(1) of that Convention, to the detriment of Juan Humberto Sánchez and his next of kin, María Dominga Sánchez (the mother); Juan José Vijil Hernández (the stepfather); Reina Isabel Sánchez (sister); María Milagro Sánchez (sister); Rosa Delia Sánchez (sister); Domitila Vijil Sánchez (sister); María Florinda Vijil Sánchez (sister); Julio Sánchez (brother), Juan Carlos Vijil Sánchez (brother); Celio Vijil Sánchez (brother); Donatila Argueta Sánchez (companion); Breidy Maybeli Sánchez Argueta (daughter); Velvia Lastenia Argueta Pereira (companion) and Norma Iveth Sánchez Argueta (daughter). XII NON-COMPLIANCE WITH ARTICLE 1(1) (OBLIGATION TO RESPECT RIGHTS) Pleadings of the representatives of the alleged victim 151 Bámaca Velásquez Case, supra note 25, para. 129; Fairén Garbi and Solís Corrales Case. Judgment of March 15, 1989. Series C No. 6, para. 152; Godínez Cruz Case, supra note 33, paras. 168191; and Velásquez Rodríguez Case, supra note 33, paras. 159-181. 152 Cf. Bámaca Velásquez Case, supra note 25, para. 129; Fairén Garbi and Solís Corrales Case, supra note 151, para. 152; Godínez Cruz Case, supra note 33, paras. 168-191; and Velásquez Rodríguez Case, supra note 33, paras. 159-181. 153 Trujillo Oroza Case, Reparations, supra note 22, paras. 99-101 and 109; and Bámaca Velásquez Case. Reparations, (Art. 63(1) American Convention on Human Rights). Judgment of February 22, 2002. Series C No. 91, paras. 74-77.