40 136. The Court finds that the events of the present case demonstrate that this combination of acts caused grave suffering for the members of the Judicial Commission in an environment of uncertainty about what was to become of them, and profound fear that they would be deprived of their lives in a violent and arbitrary manner, which, in effect, is what happened to most of them. The Court further finds that these acts constitute a grave violation of the right to personal integrity under Article 5(1) and 5(2) of the American Convention. C.2) Violation of the right to personal integrity of the victims’ next of kin 137. In addition, with regard to the violation of Article 5 of the Convention to detriment of the next of kin of the victims, the Court recalls that the next of kin of victims of certain violations of human rights may be, at the same time, victims of violations.113 On this issue, the Court has found that the right of the victims’ next of kin to mental and moral integrity may be violated as a result of the particular circumstances of the violations perpetrated against their loved ones and due to the subsequent actions or omissions of the State authorities with regard to these events.114 138. In its application, the Commission requested that the Court declare Colombia responsible for the violation of Article 5(2) of the Convention to the detriment of “the next of kin of the deceased victims”, “in light of the way in which their loved ones were executed as well as the fact that the truth of the events has not been duly judicially clarified in an exhaustive manner.” Likewise, it stated that “[d]ue to the characteristics of the present case, it may be inferred that the next of kin of the victims have suffered an infringement of their right to not be submitted to inhuman treatment.” On this issue, the representatives concurred in the Commission’s request, but added that the violation of Article 5(2) should also be declared to the detriment of the surviving victims’ next of kin. In their brief containing pleadings and motions they included the wife, children, and siblings of surviving victim Arturo Salgado Garzón in their list of next of kin to be considered victims. They further added that “[t]he suffering of the victims’ next of kin has been aggravated since they had to confront the reality that their loved ones, all of whom were Colombian State officials, died or were injured as a result of the acts and omissions of their government.” 139. As was indicated above (supra para. 48), the Court granted full effect to the State’s acknowledgment of responsibility for the violation of Article 5 “with regard to victims’ next of kin” who were identified by the Commission in its application and by the representatives in the brief containing pleadings and motions, which includes the next of kin of the 12 deceased victims, as well as the next of kin of surviving victim Arturo Salgado Garzón. * * * 140. Based on the foregoing considerations, as well as the State’s acknowledgment of responsibility and the grounds presented in the section on the International Responsibility of the State (supra para. 101), the Court finds that Colombia violated the rights to personal liberty, personal integrity, and life, enshrined respectively in Articles 7, 5(1) and 5(2) and 4 of the American Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) of the same, to the detriment of 113 Cf. Case of the Miguel Castro Castro Prison, supra note 8, para. 335; Case of Vargas Areco, supra note 8, para. 83; Case of Goiburú et al., supra note 11, para. 96. 114 Cf. Case of the Miguel Castro Castro Prison, supra note 8, para. 335; Case of Vargas Areco, supra note 8, para. 96; Case of Goiburú et al., supra note 11, para. 96.