102 k) in situations of serious injuries, resulting from the use of force by state authorities, the norm that enshrines the right to humane treatment demands that the State adopt immediate measures to protect the physical integrity of the person under police custody, judicial authorities or penitentiary authorities. The State has the specific positive duty to protect the physical integrity of any person deprived of their liberty, which includes the adoption of the actions necessary to maintain an adequate health standard. Lack of an adequate medical treatment in said situation must be qualified as inhuman treatment; l) in the specific circumstance of the present case, the Commission requested that the Court declare that, once the operative “Transfer 1” had concluded, the lack of a timely and adequate medical attention to the injured parties listed in the application, as well as the lack of adoption of the actions necessary to guarantee in a timely and effective manner the procedures and medicines necessary to reestablish the highest health level possible in all the people injure during the events of the present case, constitute a violation to Article 5 of the Convention and a failure to comply with the general obligation of respect and guarantee contemplated in Article 1(1) of the same; “Solitary Confinement” m) once the operative “Transfer 1” had concluded, the male and female inmates were not allowed to communicate with their next of kin and attorneys for several days and in some cases for weeks. The latter places the individual in an unnecessary situation of vulnerability, where solitary confinement may be, in itself, a form of mistreatment. The Peruvian authorities should have allowed the survivors to communicate with their next of kin and attorneys in order to inform them of their situation and diminish the general uncertainty caused by the facts; “Lack of information to the next of kin regarding the situation of the alleged victims” n) in the final written arguments it indicated that the negligent or intentional inattention of the next of kin, who awaited in the surroundings of the prison, in the hospitals, and the morgues, constitutes in itself a violation to the right to humane treatment, due to the psychic anguish that the unjustified delay in informing on who died and who was injured caused in the next of kin; o) in the final written arguments it stated that especially the mothers tried, unsuccessfully, to obtain information on the situation of their next of kin, receiving all type of insults and physical aggressions. Similarly, they had to go through terrible conditions to find their loved ones and recover their remains, once they were able to identify them. Mrs. Julia Peña was told on several occasions that her daughter was not in the morgue, and in order to be able to bury her she had to enter said place stealthily, opening the refrigerators, having to face the horror of decomposed and even cut up bodies of other victims, that had also been denied to their next of kin. During this entire process she did not receive any assistance from the officials in charge of the morgue; and