37 Jesús María [Valle Jaramillo] not only provided the fundamental financial support for the family group with whom he lived, but he also helped his other siblings and nephews and nieces, who were quite numerous. […] All of Jesús María’s siblings, nephews, and nieces suffered morally and mentally due to the strong ties of affection that they all shared with him.87 124. In a sworn statement, Juan Guillermo Valle Noreña indicated, similarly, that Jesús María Valle Jaramillo “was always attentive to every problem of all [the family members], trying to resolve them in the best way possible. [Jesús María Valle Jaramillo w]as always attentive to the needs of his mother, his father, his siblings; to ensure that they wanted for nothing, and of […] his nephews and nieces with even more reason.”88 125. In this regard, the Court observes that, although Mauricio Alberto Herrera Valle, Claudia Helena Herrera Valle, Liliana María Herrera Valle and Berta Lucía Valle Noreña are nephew and nieces of Jesús María Valle Jaramillo, and the statements referred to above referred to the suffering that his death caused to his “nephews and nieces,” those statements are very general and do not authenticate a specific close tie between Jesús María Valle Jaramillo and Mauricio Alberto Herrera Valle, Claudia Helena Herrera Valle, Liliana María Herrera Valle and Berta Lucía Valle Noreña, nor do they allow the Court to infer that the facts of the case allegedly specifically impaired the living conditions of each of them. The Court therefore finds that a violation of their personal integrity has not been proved. 126. The Court also observes that the State indicated that “the birth certificate of Gilma Valle Jaramillo (sister, deceased) was not provided”; it therefore argued that there was no evidence of “her relationship with Jesús María Valle Jaramillo or the date of her death that would allow a determination of whether she qualified as an injured party.” In this regard, the Court notes that in a sworn statement, Guillermo Valle Noreña refers to Blanca Inés Valle Jaramillo as one of his paternal aunts, clarifying that “everyone knew [her] as Gilma.”89 In this regard, the witness, Darío Arcila Arenas declared that, for “Gilma, one of his older sisters, the death of Jesús María [Valle Jaramillo] caused her profound sadness that lasted several years, until she died of a heart attack.”90 Moreover, the Court observes that the State included Blanca Inés Valle Jaramillo as a party in the conciliation agreement arranged at the domestic level (infra, para. 202). Therefore, from the evidence provided during the proceedings, it is clear that Blanca Inés Valle Jaramillo, also known as “Gilma,” was Jesús María Valle Jaramillo’s sister, who suffered a grave alteration of her living conditions as a result of the facts of the case, and who died subsequently.91 127. Based on the above, the Court finds that the State is responsible for the violation of the right to personal integrity embodied in Article 5(1) of the Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) thereof, to the detriment of the following next of kin of Jesús María Valle Jaramillo: Blanca Inés Valle Jaramillo, Juan Guillermo Valle Noreña, John Jairo Valle Noreña and Luz Adriana Valle Noreña. 87 Statement made by the witness, Darío Arcila Arenas, supra note 85. 88 Statement made by the witness, Juan Guillermo Valle Noreña, supra note 83. 89 Statement made by the witness, Juan Guillermo Valle Noreña, supra nota 83 (folio 2244). 90 Statement made by the witness, Juan Guillermo Valle Noreña, supra nota 83 (folio 2244), and statement made by the witness, Darío Arcila Arenas, supra note 85 91 858). Birth certificate of Blanca Inés Valle Jaramillo (file of attachments to the pleadings and motions brief, folio