43 137. The Court has stated on other occasions that the next of kin of the victims of human rights violations may, in turn, be victims. The Tribunal has held as violated the right to psychological and moral integrity of the next of kin of victims because of the additional pain they have suffered as a result of the particular circumstances of the violations perpetrated against their loved ones and because of the subsequent actions or omissions of State officials regarding the facts.144 138. The Court considers, in the case of Yenys Bernardino Rosendo, who was a few months old at the time the events occurred, that one of the damages suffered was the exile she had to face with her mother as a consequence of the events, the distance from her community and her indigenous culture, and the dismemberment of her family. The expert Correa Gonzalez, indicated that “the child has suffered in [eight] years, at least one drastic change from the country to the city, and three other changes in the city, which translates into changes in schools, neighborhoods, friends, and everyday living which affects the formation of her identity.”145 These moves meant that her child was raised far from her maternal family, with whom she was very close with, so much so that she states that “she doesn’t want to be in the city, but rather with her grandparents in Caxitepec.”146 Moreover, the psychologist, González Marín said that the girl child, Yenys Bernardino Rosendo, “has grown amidst a violent scenario, which has resulted in her feelings of insecurity and vulnerability.” On the other hand, changes of residence "have caused confusion [and] she constantly questions her mother as to why they have been apart from the community.” Moreover, the moves implied that as a consequence, her education outside of her community would be carried out exclusively in Spanish.147 Lastly, the circumstances in which her infancy is developing, according to the expert Correa, could in the future form emotional wounds.148 139. Based on the aforementioned considerations, the Court concludes that the rape of Mrs. Rosendo Cantú, the consequences of said rape, as well as impunity in the present case, provoked emotional harm to Yenys Bernardino Rosendo, in contravention of the rights recognized in Article 5(1) of the American Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) of said treaty. * * * 140. Regarding the alleged violation of the right to personal integrity of Mrs. Rosendo Cantu’s other family members, the Court indicates that according to its jurisprudence, the alleged victims should be identified in the application and in the Commission’s report pursuant to Article 50 of the American Convention. Moreover, in conformity with Article 33(1) of the Rules of Procedure, it is a task of the Commission and not of the Court to identify, in detail and at the appropriate procedural moment, whom the alleged victims are in the case before the Court.149 Taking into account the abovementioned, in accordance with that reiterated in its jurisprudence, the Court considers as victims those 144 Cf. Case of Blake v. Guatemala. Merits. Judgment of January 24, 1998. Series C No. 36, para. 114; Case of Radilla Pacheco, supra note 36, para. 161, Case of Chitay Nech et al., supra note 25, para. 220 145 Statement by Mrs. Correa González rendered before a public notary, supra note 127, folio 1261. Cf. Sworn statement of psychologist Alejandra González Marín on October 22, 2009 (case file annexes to the brief of pleadings and motions, tome I, folio 5482). 146 Sworn statement of psychologist González Marín, supra note 145, folio 5482. Cf. Statement by Mrs. Correa González rendered before a public notary, supra note 127, folios 1261 and 1262. 147 Cf. Sworn statement of psychologist González Marín, supra note 145, folio 5481. 148 Cf. Statement by Mrs. Correa González rendered before a public notary, supra note 127, folio 1261. 149 Cf. Case of las Masacres of Ituango, supra note 130, para. 98; Case of the Dos Erres Massacre, supra note 27, para. 20, and Case of Chitay Nech et al., supra note 25, para. 44.