VII.II. Rights to judicial guarantees,215 judicial protection216 and equality before the law,217 in relation to Articles 1(1) and 2 of the American Convention and Article 7 of the Convention of Belém do Pará, to the detriment of the next of kin of Claudina Velásquez Paiz A. Arguments of the Commission and of the parties 136. The Commission argued that, at the time of the facts, there was a context of violence against women, known to the State, in which acts of violence remained unpunished. Also, the way in which discriminatory stereotyping operated during investigations had already been recorded. In the specific case, the Commission identified a series of irregularities during the investigation into the death of Claudina Velásquez, including flaws in the preservation of the crime scene and the evidence, shortcomings in the handling and analysis of the evidence collected, lack of rigor and delay in the investigation, and omissions and lack of consistency in the investigation reports. It also indicated that the Ombudsman had found that Jorge Rolando Velásquez had sometimes been prevented from accessing the case file. Consequently, it considered that the Guatemala had failed to comply with its obligation to act with due diligence to identify those responsible for the crime, allowing this act of violence to remain unpunished and creating an environment conducive to the chronic repetition of acts of violence against women in violation of Articles 8(1) and 25 of the Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) of this instrument and Article 7 of the Convention of Belém do Pará. 137. The Commission asserted that Claudina Velásquez’s death was not investigated as a case of gender-based violence, and no measures were taken or protocols or guidelines used to duly investigate this violence. In this regard, it referred to the absence of investigative procedures based on the suspicion that she had been subjected to sexual violence. Also, it considered that she was the victim of stereotyping because she was young and her body was found in a lowincome area, and due to her manner of dress and that she had a pierced navel. As a result, the authorities justified the violence against her and failed to investigate her death appropriately. Consequently, the Commission determined that the State had violated Article 7 of the Convention of Belém do Pará in relation to Article 24 of the American Convention, and in conformity with Article 1(1) of this instrument. It also found that Article 11 of that American Convention had been violated, in relation to Article 1(1) thereof, to the detriment of Claudina Isabel Velásquez Paiz. 138. The representatives agreed with the Commission. They added that, even though the doctor who performed the autopsy had been sanctioned for the errors he committed in this regard, errors continue to be committed and the State “has not taken effective measures to improve the autopsy protocols or order the forensic physicians to use the United Nations Manual.” They also argued that the State had not been capable of obtaining the testimony of all those who were relevant for the investigation, and that this deficiency arose from the negligence of the prosecutors in charge of the investigation, the fear of the witnesses, and the absence of Article 8(1) of the American Convention establishes: “Every person has the right to a hearing, with due guarantees and within a reasonable time, by a competent, independent, and impartial tribunal, previously established by law, in the substantiation of any accusation of a criminal nature made against him or for the determination of his rights and obligations of a civil, labor, fiscal, or any other nature”. 216 Article 25 of the American Convention establishes: “1. Everyone has the right to simple and prompt recourse, or any other effective recourse, to a competent court or tribunal for protection against acts that violate his fundamental rights recognized by the constitution or laws of the state concerned or by this Convention, even though such violation may have been committed by persons acting in the course of their official duties. 2. The States Parties undertake: (a) to ensure that any person claiming such remedy shall have his rights determined by the competent authority provided for by the legal system of the state; (b) to develop the possibilities of judicial remedy; and (c) to ensure that the competent authorities shall enforce such remedies when granted. 217 Article 24 of the American Convention establishes: “All persons are equal before the law. Consequently, they are entitled, without discrimination, to equal protection of the law.” 215 49