51 the correct treatment. [… S]he remembers when they made the accusation at the [Attorney General of the Republic], before the [Special] Prosecutors’ Office, the Public Prosecutor told a friend, ‘hey lady wouldn’t it be easier for her to find a new husband instead of looking for this one’. […] They would ask people […] ‘¿did your relative hang around with Lucio Cabañas? […] you are 155 also responsible, because if your relative was in the armed movement, you are to blame’. 170. In similar terms, Mrs. Andrea Radilla Martínez testified that: She file[d] a criminal accusation in 1992 before the Public Prosecutors’ Office with the help of representatives of the National Human Rights Commission, in a very tense environment because she felt she was facing the dock because of the very unfriendly treatment of the Agent, and the looks of his colleagues, all of which seemed to question [her] based on the stigma brought upon 156 her because she was the daughter of a detainee who disappeared during the dirty war. 171. Additionally, the Court observes that according to the report on the psychosocial effects on the next of kin of Mr. Rosendo Radilla, his disappearance has had a traumatic and differentiated impact on the family as a whole due to the forced restructuring of roles of each one of its members with the evident effects on each of their life projects.157 Both Mr. Rosendo Radilla Martínez158 and Mrs. Andrea Radilla Martínez offered statements in that sense. The latter testified that: [Her] life changed completely, from feeling protected, supported, and at peace, se went on to feeling responsible for [her] mother and her responsibilities, [s]he fe[lt] interrogated, watched, and 159 that everybody turned their back on her, anguish went on to be [her] natural state. 172. Taking into account the aforementioned, this Tribunal concludes that the violation to the right to humane treatment of the next of kin of Mr. Rosendo Radilla-Pacheco has occurred based on the situations and circumstances lived by them during the disappearance of the latter. These infringements, included comprehensively in the complexity of forced disappearance (supra paras. 138 through 146), subsist while the factors of impunity that were verified persist.160 Therefore, the State is responsible for the violation of the right to humane treatment of Tita, Andrea, and Rosendo, all of surnames Radilla Martínez, acknowledged in Article 5(1) and 5(2) of the Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) of the same. IX REGARDING THE RIHT TO ACCESS JUSTICE AND THE OBLIGATION TO CARRY OUT EFFECTIVE INVESTIGATIONS 155 Cf. Statement offered by Mrs. Tita Radilla Martínez during the public hearing held before the InterAmerican Court on July 7, 2009. 156 Cf. Statement offered by Mrs. Andrea Radilla Martínez before notary public (affidavit on June 10, 2009 (dossier on merits, volume IV, folio 1159). 157 Cf. Antillón Najlis, Ximena, Forced Disappearance during the dirty war: psychosocial effect on individuals, the family, and the community. The forced disappearance of Rosendo Radilla-Pacheco in Atoyac de Álvarez, Guerrero (dossier of appendixes to the brief of pleadings and motions, appendix K, folio 2270). 158 Cf. Statement offered by Mr. Rosendo Radilla Martínez during the public hearing held before the InterAmerican Court on July 7, 2009. 159 Cf. statement offered by Mrs. Andrea Radilla Martínez before notary public (affidavit) (dossier on merits, volume IV, folio 1159). 160 Cf. Case of Goiburú et al. v. Paraguay, supra note 83, para. 103; Case of La Cantuta v. Peru, supra note 51, para. 126, and Case of Anzualdo Castro v. Peru, supra note 44, para. 114.