42 Lucía Correa (wife), Carlos Enrique Jaramillo Correa (son), and María Lucía Jaramillo Correa (daughter). However, the State failed to mention Ana Carolina Jaramillo Correa, who is also the daughter of Carlos Fernando Jaramillo Correa, as a victim of said article, despite having included her as part of his nuclear family in its acquiescence to the violation of the rights embodied in Articles 5, 7(1), 7(2), 8(1), and 25(1) of the Convention. 143. In this regard, the relationship between Carlos Fernando Jaramillo Correa and Ana Carolina Jaramillo Correa has been proved by documents issued by competent authorities of the State.103 Having said this, the Court also notes that in his testimony during the public hearing before the Court, Carlos Fernando Jaramillo Correa stated that due to his collaboration with the investigation into the murder of Jesús María Valle Jaramillo, he, his wife, and their “three children” went into exile,”104 demonstrating that Ana Carolina Jaramillo Correa was also affected by the facts of the case. 144. Based on the foregoing, the Court declares that the State is responsible for the violation of the right to freedom of movement and residence established in Article 22(1) of the Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) thereof, to the detriment of Carlos Fernando Jaramillo Correa, his wife, Gloria Lucía Correa, his son, Carlos Enrique Jaramillo Correa, and his daughters, María Lucía Jaramillo Correa and Ana Carolina Jaramillo Correa. VIII VIOLATION OF ARTICLES 8(1) (JUDICIAL GUARANTEES)105 AND 25(1) (JUDICIAL PROTECTION)106 OF THE AMERICAN CONVENTION, IN RELATION TO ARTICLE 1(1) (OBLIGATION TO RESPECT RIGHTS) THEREOF 145. The Commission alleged that the State is responsible for the violation of Articles 8(1) and 25 of the Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) thereof, to the detriment of Nelly Valle Jaramillo and her next of kin; Carlos Fernando Jaramillo Correa and his next of kin, and the next of kin of Jesús María Valle Jaramillo, since the “the State has not provided the means necessary to comply with its obligation to investigate, prosecute, and punish those responsible and make reparations to the victims and their next of kin.” In addition, the Commission indicated that “the investigation and the proceedings that have been conducted have lasted for more than eight years without the courts having tried those responsible.” In this regard, it emphasized that “those convicted in absentia have not been captured; the State has not presented specific information on the efforts made in this regard and, from the publicly-known context, it is clear that there is little likelihood of these sentences being served and providing an effective remedy.” 146. The representatives indicated that, “in the instant case, the State has not guaranteed the right of Jesús María Valle’s next of kin and of society as a whole to know the 103 Birth certificate of Ana Carolina Jaramillo Correa (file of attachments to the pleadings and motions brief, tome I, appendix D, folio 882). 104 Testimony given by the witness, Carlos Fernando Jaramillo Correa, supra note 97. 105 Article 8(1) of the Convention establishes that “[e]very 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.” 106 Article 25(1) of the Convention indicates that “[e]veryone 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.”