24 investigations and proceedings instituted into the death of José Luis García Ibarra; and iii) the right to human treatment in the case of José Luis García Ibarra’s next of kin. A. The right to life and the right of children to special protection 127. The pertinent part of Article 4 of the American Convention reads as follows: 1. Every person has the right to have his life respected. This right shall be protected by law and, in general, from the moment of conception. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his life. 128. For its part, Article 1(1) of the American Convention provides that: The States Parties to this Convention undertake to respect the rights and freedoms recognized herein and to ensure to all persons subject to their jurisdiction the free and full exercise of those rights and freedoms, without any discrimination for reasons of race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, economic status, birth, or any other social condition. 129. As for the right to life, the jurisprudence constante of the Inter-American Court is that the right to life is a fundamental right the full exercise of which is a prerequisite for the enjoyment of all other human rights.78 The Court has also held that this means that States have the obligation to guarantee the creation of the conditions required in order that violations of this basic right do not occur and, in particular, the duty to prevent its agents or private citizens from violating it.79 As the Court wrote, the object and purpose of the Convention, as an instrument for the protection of the human being, requires that the right to life be interpreted and enforced so that its guarantees are truly practical and effective (effet utile).80 130. The Court has repeatedly held that “compliance with the duties imposed by Article 4 of the American Convention, in conjunction with Article 1(1) thereof, not only presupposes that no person can be arbitrarily deprived of his life (negative duty) but also requires, pursuant to their obligation to guarantee the full and free exercise of human rights, that the States adopt any and all necessary measures to protect and preserve the right to life (positive duty) of the individuals under their jurisdiction.”81 Therefore, in the words of the Court, 78 I/A Court H.R., Case of Zambrano Vélez et al. V. Ecuador. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of July 4, 2007. Series C No. 166, Paragraph 78; I/A Court H.R., Case of the “Street Children” (Villagrán Morales et al.) v. Guatemala. Judgment of November 19, 1999. Series C No. 63, paragraph 144. 79 I/A Court H.R., Case of the “Street Children” (Villagrán Morales et al.) v. Guatemala. Judgment of November 19, 1999. Series C No. 63, paragraph 144. 80 I/A Court H.R., Case of Zambrano Vélez et al. v. Ecuador. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of July 4, 2007. Series C No. 166, paragraph 79; I/A Court H.R., Case of Baldeón García v. Argentina. Judgment of April 6, 2006. Series C No. 147, paragraph 83. 81 I/A Court H.R., Case of Zambrano Vélez et al. v. Ecuador. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of July 4, 2007. Series C No. 166. Paragraph 80; I/A Court H.R., Case of the “Street Children” (Villagrán Morales et al.) v. Guatemala. Judgment of November 19, 1999. Series C No. 63. Paragraph 144.