and children were dropping charges, without taking into account that Mr. Palma’s mother had filed separate charges or taking into account that the matter was a violent death—as established in its own medical-legal certification—and that therefore the State had the obligation to pursue all possible persons involved in the crime in an diligent manner. 114. The Commission also recalls that the State can be held liable internationally for actions committed by third parties or private parties, when the State fails to comply with its duties of prevention and its obligation to provide guarantees. Said international responsibility may also be generated by acts of private individuals not attributable in principle to the State. The States Party to the Convention have erga omnes obligations to respect protective provisions and to ensure the effectiveness of the rights set forth therein under any circumstances and regarding all persons. The effect of these obligations of the State goes beyond the relationship between its agents and the persons under its jurisdiction, as it is also reflected in the positive obligation of the State to take such steps as may be necessary to ensure effective protection of human rights in relations amongst individuals. The State may be found liable for acts by private individuals in cases in which, through actions or omissions by its agents when they are in the position of guarantors, the State does not fulfill these erga omnes obligations embodied in Articles 1(1) and 2 of the Convention.96 115. In this sense, the obligations established in the American Convention, and especially in this provision, “are not fulfilled simply by not violating the rights and liberties proclaimed in them (obligation to respect), but also include an obligation to guarantee the free and full exercise of rights to all persons subject to their jurisdiction (obligation to guarantee).”97 116. The IACHR observes that, just as in past cases,98 when the situation is one of a violent death, it becomes necessary to analyze and evaluate the actions undertaken by the State in light of the criteria established in the “Manual on the Effective Prevention and Investigation of Extra-legal, Arbitrary, and Summary Executions”99 in order to determine if the state has fulfilled its duty to immediately, exhaustively, and impartially investigate the facts related to the death of Mr. Palma. The importance of the Manual lies in the fact that its primary purpose is to “discover the truth about the events leading to the suspicious death of a victim”100 To that effect, this Manual establishes that those who conduct an inquiry into a “suspicious death,” such as the one that occurred in this case, shall at a minimum seek: (a) To identify the victim; (b) To recover and preserve evidentiary material related to the death to aid in any potential prosecution of those responsible; 96 Inter-American Court of Human Rights. Case of The Massacre of Mapiripán Vs. Colombia. Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of September 15, 2005. Ser. C. No. 134, para. 111. 97 Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Case of Velásquez Rodríguez Vs. Honduras. Merits. Judgment of July 29, 1988. Ser. C No. 4, para. 165. 98 Inter-American Court of Human Rights. Report No. 48/97, Case 11.411, Merits, Severiano and Hermelindo Santiz Gómez “Ejido Morelia”, México, February 18, 1998; Report No. 34/00, Case 11.291, Merits, Carandirú, Brasil, April 13, 2000; and Report No. 1/98, Case 11.543, Merits, Rolando Hernández Hernández, México, May 5, 1998. 99 Adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1991. Document ST/CSDHA/12. 100 Manual on the Effective Prevention and Investigation of Extra-legal, Arbitrary, and Summary Executions, adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations in 1991. Document ST/CSDHA/12, para. 9