concludes that the State did not carry out a diligent investigation that would allow, within a reasonable time, ability to determine the facts and, if applicable, the corresponding legal consequences. Thus, the State is obliged to address this situation of impunity by all available legal means, since this fosters the chronic repetition of human rights violations and the defenselessness of the victims.121 143. Therefore, the Court concludes that the State did not act with due diligence to investigate, prosecute and, where appropriate, punish those possibly responsible for the death of Mr. Valenzuela within a reasonable time, continuing the impunity in this case. Consequently, this Court considers that the State is responsible for the violation of the judicial guarantees enshrined in Articles 8(1) and 25(1) of the American Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) of the same treaty, to the detriment of Tirso Román Valenzuela Ávila. b) Lack of investigation into the torture of Mr. Valenzuela 144. As ruled in the section on the partial acknowledgment of responsibility made by the State, the dispute regarding the failure to investigate the torture suffered by Mr. Valenzuela ceased. Consequently, the Court finds that the State violated the judicial guarantees and judicial protection enshrined in Articles 8(1) and 25(1) of the American Convention, in relation to Articles 1, 6 and 8 of the Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture, to the detriment of Tirso Román Valenzuela Ávila. C. Conclusion 145. Based on the foregoing, the Court considers that the judicial guarantees were not observed in the criminal proceedings against Mr. Valenzuela, since these proceedings culminated in a death sentence, where his rights to due process were affected, therefore the State is responsible for the violation of the rights of presumption of innocence, and of not testifying against oneself, and the right to appeal the ruling, enshrined in articles 8(2), 8(2)(g) and 8(2)(h) of the American Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) of the Convention, to the detriment of Tirso Román Valenzuela Ávila. 146. In addition, the Court concludes that the State did not act with due diligence to investigate, prosecute and, where appropriate, punish those possibly responsible for the death of Mr. Valenzuela within a reasonable time, prolonging the impunity in this case. Therefore, the State is responsible for the violation of judicial guarantees to a fair trial and judicial protection, enshrined in Articles 8(1) and 25(1) of the American Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) thereof, to the detriment of Tirso Román Valenzuela Ávila. 147. Finally, the Court considers that, in accordance with the partial acknowledgment of responsibility made by the State, it is responsible for the violation of judicial guarantees and judicial protection, enshrined in Articles 8(1) and 25(1) of the American Convention, in relation to with Article 1(1) of the Convention and in relation to Articles 1, 6 and 8 of the Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture, to the detriment of Tirso Román Valenzuela Ávila, for failing to investigate the torture he suffered. VIII-2 RIGHT TO LIFE AND FREEDOM FROM EX POST FACTO LAWS, ON THE APPLICATION OF THE DEATH PENALTY TO MR. VALENZUELA ÁVILA 122 Cf. Velásquez Rodríguez v. Honduras, supra, para. 174, and Case of Omeara Carrascal et al. v. Colombia, supra, para. 263. 122 Articles 4(2) and 9 of the American Convention. 121 37