that the next-of-kin of victims of certain human rights violations may, in turn, be considered victims.214 In that regard, the Court has ruled that their right to mental and moral integrity [may be] violated based on the ... particular circumstances of the violations perpetrated against their loved ones and owing to the subsequent acts or omissions of the State authorities in relation to the facts.215 172. Specifically with respect to cases where a complete and effective investigation was lacking, as in this matter, the Court has held that: The absence of a complete and effective investigation into the facts constitutes a source of additional suffering and anguish for victims and their next of kin, who have the right to know the truth of what happened. This right to the truth requires a procedural determination of the most complete historical truth possible, including the determination of patterns of collective action and of all those who, in different ways, took part in the said violations, as well as their corresponding responsibilities.216 173. Based on the foregoing, the Commission considers that the disappearance of a loved one and the lack of a thorough and effective investigation which in turn causes pain if the truth is not revealed, in themselves constitute harm to the mental and moral integrity of the members of Mayra Angelina Gutiérrez's family. The IACHR also notes that Ms. Gutiérrez's family have said that they are also afraid that something similar might happen to them. It is clear to the Commission that the anguish that the victim's family have endured in the quest to obtain justice and uncover the truth about what happened, the lack of effective protection, and the profound suffering and radical change wrought on their lives have harmed their wellbeing. 174. Accordingly, the Commission concludes that the State violated the right respect for mental and moral integrity enshrined in Article 5(1) of the American Convention in connection with the duty to ensure rights recognized in Article 1(1) thereof, to the detriment of Mayra Angelina Gutiérrez’s family: her daughter Ángela María del Carmen Argüello Gutiérrez, her sisters Ángela and Nilda Gutiérrez, and her brother Armando Gutiérrez. VI. CONCLUSIONS 175. Based on the factual and legal considerations set out above, the Inter-American Commission concludes that the State of Guatemala is responsible for violation of the rights to life, humane treatment, a fair trial, equal protection and non-discrimination, and judicial protection recognized at Articles 4, 5, 8, 24, and 25 of the American Convention taken in conjunction with the obligations enshrined in Article 1 (1) of that international instrument, to the detriment of the persons named in each section of this report. The Commission also concludes that the State violated the duty to investigate recognized in Article I(b) of the Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearance of Persons. 176. Based on the foregoing conclusions, THE INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS 214 I/A Court H.R., Case of Cantoral-Huamaní and García-Santa Cruz v. Peru. Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of July 10, 2007. Series C No. 167, par. 112; and Case of Bueno-Alves v. Argentina. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of May 11, 2007. Series C No. 164, par. 102. 215 I/A Court H.R., Case of Cantoral-Huamaní and García-Santa Cruz v. Peru. Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of July 10, 2007. Series C No. 167, par. 112; and Case of Vargas-Areco v. Paraguay. Judgment of September 26, 2006. Series C No. 155, par. 96. 216 I/A Court H.R., Case of Valle Jaramillo et al. v. Colombia. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of November 27, 2008. Series C No. 192, par. 102; I/A Court H.R., Case of the Rochela Massacre v. Colombia. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of May 11, 2007. Series C, No. 163, par. 195; Case of Heliodoro-Portugal v. Panama. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of August 12, 2008. Series C No. 186, par. 146; and Case of García-Prieto et al v. El Salvador. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of November 20, 2007. Series C No. 168, par. 102. 36