29 117. According to the body of evidence in the case, the arguments of the Commission and the representatives, and the declaration of the State regarding the suffering caused to the next of kin of Saúl Cantoral-Huamaní and Consuelo García-Santa Cruz owing to the death of the latter “in rather unclear circumstances,” and the absence of the investigation and punishment of those responsible, the Court concludes that there has been a violation of the personal integrity of the next of kin of Saúl Cantoral-Huamaní and Consuelo García-Santa Cruz. 118. The Court finds it has been proved that this harm to their person integrity was suffered by the spouse, parents, children and siblings of Saúl Cantoral-Huamaní, and the parents and siblings of Consuelo García-Santa Cruz. The expert opinion of the psychologist is particularly illustrative, because it highlights the break-up of the family due to the death of Saúl Cantoral since his wife was obliged to “[…] go out to work while she completed her professional studies […]. She studied during the day and worked in the evening, so that her children were left alone, even at Christmas [and] on Mothers’ Day.” For the siblings of Saúl Cantoral “the effects of his death […] are related to the search for justice that became a central part of the life of some of them. Their entire life, the care of their children and family, are the costs they have incurred for undertaking this struggle […].”82 119. Regarding the family of Consuelo García-Santa Cruz, the psychologist’s expert opinion reveals that the circumstances of the death of a loved one affected her mother and her six siblings who were interviewed in the same way: “it can be observed that they all said the same thing in the individual interviews. There is not much difference between them […] they have the same difficulties […] even their feelings and the effects on them are similar.”83 120. Based on the foregoing, the Court concludes that the right to humane treatment was violated with regard to the following next of kin of Saúl Cantoral Huamaní and Consuelo García Santa Cruz. In the case of Saúl Cantoral-Huamaní, these next of kin are: Pelagia Mélida Contreras-Montoya de Cantoral (wife); Elisa Huamaní-Infazón and Patrocinio Cantoral-Contreras (parents, both deceased); Marco Antonio Cantoral-Lozano, Vanessa Cantoral-Contreras, Brenda Cantoral-Contreras and Rony Cantoral-Contreras (children); Juan Cantoral-Huamaní, Ulises Cantoral-Huamaní, Eloy Cantoral-Huamaní, Gertrudis Victoria Cantoral-Huamaní and Angélica Cantoral-Huamaní (siblings). In the case of Consuelo García-Santa Cruz, these next of kin are: Amelia Beatriz Santa Cruz-Portocarrero (mother) and Alfonso García-Rada (father, deceased); Rosa Amelia García-Santa Cruz, Manuel Fernando García-Santa Cruz, María Elena García-Santa Cruz, Walter Ernesto GarcíaSanta Cruz, Mercedes Grimaneza García-Santa Cruz and Jesús Enrique García-Santa Cruz (siblings). 121. Finally, the Court will refer to the persons who will not be considered victims in the instant case. Regarding Rafael Cantoral-Rojas, Yolanda Cantoral-Rojas, Alberto GarcíaSanta Cruz and Alfonso García-Santa Cruz, despite helpful evidence provided by the representatives certifying their relationship with Saúl Cantoral-Huamaní and Consuelo García-Santa Cruz respectively, the Court observes that the body of evidence in the case does not prove that their personal integrity has been affected in the terms of Article 5 of the American Convention. In addition, the Court observes that the Commission had included Luis Mori Santa Cruz among the beneficiaries in the application brief. Although the representatives did not mention him in their brief with requests, arguments and evidence 82 Cf. Expert psychological report provided by Roberto Alfonso Gushiken-Miyagui on January 11, 2007 (file of preliminary exception, merits, reparations and costs, page 436). 83 Cf. Expert psychological report provided by Roberto Alfonso Gushiken-Miyagui on January 11, 2007 (file of preliminary exception, merits, reparations and costs, page 425).