59 fact that he was informed in detail of the repressive operations carried out by the military and police forces. […]55 72. The Court observes that, during the 1970s, in absolute contradiction to the principal objects and purposes of the organization of the international community established universally in the Charter of the United Nations,56 and the regional community in the Charter of the Organization of American States57 and the American Convention itself, the intelligence services of several countries of the Southern Cone of the Americas established a criminal inter-State organization with a complex assemblage, the scope of which is still being revealed today; in other words, there was a systematic practice of “State terrorism” at an inter-State level. 73. This operation also benefited from the general situation of impunity of the grave human rights violations that existed at the time, promoted and tolerated by the absence of judicial guarantees and the ineffectiveness of the judicial institutions to deal with or contain the systematic human rights violations. This is closely related to the obligation to investigate the cases of extrajudicial executions, forced disappearances and other grave human rights violations (infra paras. 80 to 85 and 111 to 122). X ARTICLES 4, 5 AND 7 OF THE AMERICAN CONVENTION IN RELATION TO ARTICLE 1(1) THEREOF (RIGHTS TO LIFE, HUMANE TREATMENT, AND PERSONAL LIBERTY) The Commission’s arguments58 74. In relation to Article 5 of the Convention, the Commission alleged that the forced disappearances caused suffering and anguish to the victims’ next of kin, in addition to a feeling of insecurity, frustration and powerlessness faced with the failure of the public authorities to investigate the facts. The violation of the physical and moral integrity of the next of kin is a direct consequence of the forced disappearance. The victims’ next of kin have suffered owing to the lack of 55 Cf. judicial decision of August 4, 1993, delivered by the Fifth Criminal Trial Court (file of attachments to the application, attachment 3(3), tome IV, folios 4530 and 4531). 56 The “peoples of the United Nations resolved […] to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small […] to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained.” (Preamble) 57 “The American States establish by this Charter the international organization that they have developed to achieve an order of peace and justice, to promote their solidarity, to strengthen their collaboration, and to defend their sovereignty, their territorial integrity, and their independence.” (Article 1) 58 Based on the State’s acknowledgement, this Court will not set forth the arguments of the InterAmerican Commission concerning the violation of Articles 4, 5 and 7 of the Convention, to the detriment of Agustín Goiburú Giménez, Carlos Mancuello Bareiro and Rodolfo and Benjamín Ramírez Villalba, which are described in the chapter “Introduction of the case” and are based on facts that have been acknowledged. For this reason, it will only record the arguments concerning the alleged violation of Article 5 of the Convention, regarding the next of kin of the alleged victims, because the State did not acquiesce to this claim.