Rafael Malpica Calzadilla in preventive detentionand to arrest him.207The IACHR does not have supporting documentary evidence regarding the rest of the proceedings conducted in 2013 and 2014, to the effect that the State took any measures to execute the arrest warrants. The latest information available about this case was provided by the petitioner in his submission of January 26, 2014, reporting that, as of that date, the arrest warrant had not been executed. V. LEGAL ANALYSIS 133. The main dispute in the instant case involves the circumstances in which the death of Johan Alexis Ortiz Hernandez came about. The petitioners claim that the death of the alleged victim was the result of the doings of State agents and was intentional, while thus far a number of pieces of evidence have not been elucidated nor disprovenby means of the investigation or judicial proceeding. They contend, in any case, that the use of live ammunition during a combat training exercise in which such use is not stipulated, in and of itself gives rise to the State’s responsibility for the death of Mr. Ortiz. In response, the State has not introduced before the IACHR any specific arguments on this claim, but based on the foregoing findings of fact, even though the domestic authoritiesraised several different theories, all of them revolve around the death being an “accident” or an act of “negligence.” 134. In this regard, the Commission recalls that international human rights protection must not be confused with criminal justice. It is not the purpose of international human rights law to impose punishment on those persons guilty of violations thereof, but rather to protect the victims, establish States’ potential responsibility and provide for reparation of any damages, which may have been caused to them by conduct attributable to the State.208 135. Accordingly, it is not the job of the IACHR to determine whether or notthere has been individual criminal liability of public officials for the death of the alleged victim, but rather to assess based on available information and in keeping with obligations under the American Convention, and the applicable rule of the burden of proof, whether the actions displayed by said agents involved international responsibility of the State. 136. Hereafter, the Commission will first determine whether the investigation conducted by the State and the judicial proceeding –which has still not reached its final conclusion- has upheld the right to a fair trial and judicial protection. Secondly, the Commission will assess whether this incident is attributable to the Venezuelan State in view of the established facts, the context in which the death of the alleged victim came about, and the way in which the investigation was conducted. Thirdly, the IACHR will examine the right to humane treatment in terms of what Mr. Ortiz experienced just prior to his death, and the investigations into these events. Lastly, the IACHR will analyze whether the right to humane treatment of the next-of-kin of Johan Ortiz Hernandez was violated by the State of Venezuela. A. The right to a fair trial and judicial protection with respect to the investigation and proceeding instituted over the death of Johan Alexis Ortiz Hernández 137. Guided bythe consistent legal precedent of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (hereinafter “the Inter-American Court” or “the Court”), it is possible to draw a conclusion as to whether the State upheld its duty to ensure the substantive rights protected under the Convention by examining the rights enshrined in Articles 8 (fair trial) and 25 (judicial protection) of the Convention. Additionally, these [… continuation] 206Annex 128. Certificate of Notification of July 18, 2013. Case SP21-P-2010-004926. Acting State Criminal Trial Court of Control of San Cristóbal. Annex to petitioners’ submission of July 24, 2013. 207Annex 125. Notice of postponement of hearing with request to execute arrest warrant of August 19, 2013. Case SP21-P2010-004926. Acting State Criminal Trial Court of Control of San Cristóbal. Annex to petitioners’ submission of September 20, 2013. para. 134. 208See: I/A Court H.R. Case of Velásquez Rodríguez v. Honduras. Preliminary Objections. Judgment June 26, 1987. Series C No. 1,