74. According to a January 2005 report by Kristi House – a non-profit organization in Miami, United States – V.P.C. began treatment there in October 2003. 126 It indicated that V.P.C. was exhibiting depression, anxiety and self-mutilating behavior.127 75. Mrs. V.P.C. stated that on April 1, 2008, her daughter was hospitalized in Miami for fifteen days to treat post-traumatic depression.128 B. Analysis of Rights 1. Rights to personal integrity, protection of honor and dignity, rights of the child, equality before the law, judicial guarantees and judicial protection (articles 5.1 129, 11.2130, 19131, 24132, 8133 y 25134 of the American Convention in connection with Article 1.1 of the same instrument and Article 7 of the Convention of Belém do Pará) 76. Preliminarily, the Commission notes that the parties do not dispute that the alleged perpetrator of rape and sexual abuse against V.R.P. is not an agent of the State nor is it a person that would have acted with the acquiescence of the State. In this sense, the analysis of the responsibility of the State is tied to its obligation to guarantee that which is established in Article 1.1 of the American Convention. This case has no elements that would allow for its analysis within the framework of the State’s preventative obligations, as it first learned of the incident by means of the complaint filed by V.R.P.’s mother after the facts had occurred. In this sense, the Commission’s analysis is related to the State’s obligation to guarantee investigation and punishment, which was activated once the State learned of the case.135 Said obligation implies conducting an effective investigation that allows the State to identify, prosecute, and punish the responsible parties.136 77. This analysis will have the following structure: i) general considerations on the substantive rights violated in cases of sexual violence or rape; ii) considerations regarding children who are victims of rape or sexual violence; iii) a legal assessment of what happened to V.R.P; iii) general considerations on the obligation to investigate and punish acts of sexual violence or rape; and iv) an analysis of the investigation carried out in this case. 126 Anexo 41. Official note from Kristi House of January 3, 2005. Annex B to the communication received on March 16, 2005. 127 Anexo 41. Official note from Kristi House of January 3, 2005. Annex B to the communication received on March 16, 2005. 128 Anexo 42. Communication from the petitioner of September 2, 2008. 129 Article 5.1 of the American Convention: Every person has the right have his physical, mental, and moral integrity respected. 130 Article 11.2 of the American Convention: No one may by the object of arbitrary or abusive interference with his private life, his family, his home, or his correspondence, or of unlawful attacks on his honor or reputation. 131 Article 19 of the American Convention: Every minor child has the right to the measures of protection required by his condition as a minor on the part of his family, society, and the state. 132 Article 24 of the American Convention: All persons are equal before the law. Consequently, they are entitled, without discrimination, to equal protection of the law. 133 Article 8.1 of the American Convention: 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. 134 Article 25.1 of the American Convention: 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. 135 IACHR Report No. 54/01, Case 12.051, Admissibility and Merits, Maria Da Penha Fernandes, Brazil, April 16, 2001. Inter-American Court. Case of González et al. (“Cotton Field”) v. Mexico. Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of November 16, 2006. Series C No.205, par. 246. 136