17 [a]ll these years in which they searched for medical information regarding their daughter’s death[,] and for justice against those responsible for that death were and still are very hard and exasperating. It is very frustrating to see the outcome after such a long time and realize that those who are guilty have not been punished and that, despite all our efforts, nothing has happened. […] They have had to carry out so many proceedings and formalities during these years that [he] is unable to recall all the actions they have undertaken; and, despite being an economist, he is not able to remember all the expenses they have incurred in seeking the elucidation of the causes of [his daughter’s] death and in the quest for justice. They have been so deeply affected that the economic point of view is no longer applicable, and still, [his] daughter’s life cannot be replaced. That is the reason why one of our wishes is to create a foundation to help people with fewer economic resources in their quest for justice. 50. In light of the foregoing, the Court considers that the lack of a judicial answer to clear up the death of Laura Albán impaired the right to humane treatment of her parents, Carmen Cornejo de Albán and Bismarck Albán-Sánchez, which renders the State responsible for violating the right enshrined in Article 5(1) of the Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) thereof, to the detriment of the aforementioned persons. c) Article 13 (Freedom of Thought and Expression) 51. The Commission submitted no arguments regarding the violation of this right. The arguments submitted by the representatives refer to facts related to the right of the next of kin to know the truth about the events surrounding the death of Laura Albán and the right of her parents to know the information contained in the medical file. 52. As regards the facts claimed by the representatives, this Court observes that the right to access the medical file is part of the right of the victim or the victim’s next of kin to have the State clear up facts constituting the violation and determining responsibility as applicable. Accordingly, the Court takes into account these considerations in examining the alleged violations of Articles 8 and 25 of the Convention. d) Article 17 (Rights of the Family) 53. The Commission did not file any arguments regarding the violation of this right. 54. The representatives alleged that the State violated Article 17 of the Convention, but only mentioned this violation, without furnishing this Court the evidentiary elements to back their allegations. The State rejected the representatives’ arguments, as set forth in paragraph 40(d) of this Judgment. 55. This Tribunal considers that the facts alleged in the instant case do not fall within the scope of Article 17 of the Convention, taking into account that the family life of the Albán-Cornejo family was affected, as the representatives alleged, as a result of the actions taken by Laura Albán’s next of kin in their quest for justice in order to clarify the circumstances surrounding Miss Albán-Cornejo's death, as was analyzed in the terms of Article 5 of the Convention (supra paras 47 to 50) and will be examined in Chapter VII in connection with Articles 8(1) and 25(1) of the Convention. Therefore, the Court shall issue no order to that respect. VII