42 VIII.1. RIGHTS TO LIFE AND TO HUMANE TREATMENT (Articles 4167 AND 5168 of the American Convention on Human Rights, regarding Article 1(1)169) 171. The Court recalls that the State recognized its international responsibility for the violation of the rights to life and humane treatment enshrined in Articles 4 and 5 of the American Convention, in relation to 1(1) of the Convention, with respect to Noel Emiro Omeara Carrascal for the actions of state agents in conjunction with illegal armed groups in his attack and subsequent death. It also recognized its responsibility in the forced disappearance and execution of Manuel Guillermo Omeara Miraval due to the actions of state agents in conjunction with illegal armed groups. In accordance with the above, the dispute continues in relation to the form of attribution of responsibility to the State for the alleged violations of the rights to life and humane treatment of Héctor Álvarez Sánchez, a matter that will be addressed in this chapter. A. Arguments of the Commission and the parties 172. The Commission observed that the attack on Héctor Álvarez Sánchez, on October 21, 1994, was carried out by a group characterized by acting in a context of collaboration with state agents, and that there is evidence of interest in silencing his investigations. The Commission considered that the State had not been able to refute the evidence of its responsibility and, therefore, concluded that it is internationally responsible for the attack against Mr. Álvarez Sánchez, the injuries sustained, and the impairment in his physical and mental health. Additionally, the Commission argued that the State did not offer him adequate protection, even though it was aware of the risk situation in which he found himself. It argued that the fact that Mr. Álvarez Sánchez survived was merely fortuitous, since the attack was carried out by shots from a firearm aimed at him and in a situation of absolute defenselessness, derived from the lack of protection measures by the State. Consequently, it argued that the State is responsible for the violation of the rights to humane treatment and life, in relation to the obligations enshrined in Article 1(1) of the Convention. 173. The representatives argued that the attack against Mr. Álvarez Sánchez is attributable to the State based on having allowed, through the participation or acquiescence of State agents, the attack on the victim’s integrity and life, which was perpetrated by GM, a member of the “Los Prada” paramilitary group. Consequently, the representatives argued that the State is responsible for the violation of the duty to respect the victim’s life and integrity. They also stated that the State is responsible for failing to comply with the obligation to guarantee these rights, both due to the lack of prevention of events and the absence of a prompt and effective investigation into the facts. In this regard, they specified that, even though the attack was perpetrated by members of the Prada family, it was committed with the tolerance and acquiescence of state agents. Consequently, they argued that the State is Article 4(1) of the Convention establishes the following: “1. Every person has the right to have his physical, mental, and moral integrity respected. 2. No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman, or degrading punishment or treatment. All persons deprived of their liberty shall be treated with respect for the inherent dignity of the human person.” 168 Articles 5.1 and 5.2 of the Convention establish the following: “1. Every person has the right to have his physical, mental, and moral integrity respected. 2. No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman, or degrading punishment or treatment. All persons deprived of their liberty shall be treated with respect for the inherent dignity of the human person.” 169 Article 1(1) of the Convention establishes the following: “1. The States Parties to this Convention undertake to respect the rights and freedoms recognized herein and to ensure to all persons subject to their jurisdiction the free and full exercise of those rights and freedoms, without any discrimination for reasons of race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, economic status, birth, or any other social condition.” 167