38 subsequent prosecutors.170 The Office of the Ombudsman issued a resolution in which it declared that the rights of Claudina Isabel Velásquez Paiz and her family members to justice within a reasonable time and to effective judicial protection had been violated.171 150. Impunity with respect to human rights violations has been defined as “the overall lack of investigation, tracking down, capture, prosecution and conviction of those responsible for violating the rights protected by the American Convention.” The Inter-American Court has ruled that the State has the obligation to use all the legal means at its disposal to combat that situation, “since impunity fosters chronic recidivism of human rights violations, and total defenselessness of victims and their relatives.”172 151. To prevent impunity, under Article 1 of the American Convention the State has an obligation to respect and ensure the rights recognized therein: The State is obligated to investigate every situation involving a violation of the rights protected by the Convention. If the State apparatus acts in such a way that the violation goes unpunished and the victim’s full enjoyment of such rights is not restored as soon as possible, the State has failed to comply with its duty to ensure the free and full exercise of those rights to the persons within its jurisdiction. The same is true when the State allows private persons or groups to act 173 freely and with impunity to the detriment of the rights recognized by the Convention. 152. Based on these considerations, the Commission concludes that in the instant case, the State failed to comply with its duty to act with due diligence in conducting a proper investigation of the facts surrounding the death of Claudina Isabel Velásquez Paiz, to punish those responsible, and thereby prevent impunity, in violation of Articles 8(1) and 25 of the American Convention, in conjunction with Article 1(1) thereof, to the detriment of Jorge Rolando Velásquez Durán, Elsa Claudina Paiz Vidal de Velásquez, and Pablo Andrés Velásquez Paiz,174 and Article 7 of the Convention of Belém do Pará. C. Right to equal protection (Article 24) and right to have one’s honor and dignity respected (Article 11), in connection with Article 1(1) of the American Convention; and right to live free of violence and discrimination (Article 7 of the Convention of Belém do Pará) 170 Appendix 26. Office of the Human Rights Ombudsman, Informe de Verificación sobre Violaciones al deber de investigar en el caso de Claudina Isabel Velásquez Paiz [Verification Report on Violations of the Duty to Investigate in the Case of Claudina Isabel Velásquez Paiz]. 171 Appendix 27. Office of the Human Rights Ombudsman, resolution of July 20, 2006 on the criminal investigation into the murder of Claudina Isabel Velásquez Paiz. 172 I/A Court H.R., Loayza Tamayo Case Reparations (Art. 63(1) American Convention on Human Rights). Judgment of November 27, 1998. Series C No. 42, par. 176, citing I/A Court H.R., Case of the “White Van” (Paniagua-Morales et al.) Judgment of March 8, 1998. Series C No. 37, par. 173. 173 IACHR, Report on Merits No. 54/01, Maria Da Penha Fernandes (Brazil), April 16, 2001, par. 43, citing I/A Court H.R., Velásquez Rodríguez Case. Judgment of July 29, 1988. Series C No. 4, par. 176, and I/A Court H.R., Case of Godínez Cruz. Judgment of January 20, 1989. Series C No. 5, par. 175. 174 See jurisprudence of the Inter-American Court: I/A Court H.R., Case of the Miguel Castro Castro Prison, Judgment of November 25, 2006. Series C No. 160, par. 408; I/A Court H.R., Case of the Massacre of Pueblo Bello v. Colombia. Judgment of January 31, 2006. Series C No. 140, par. 212; I/A Court H.R., Case of the “Mapiripán Massacre” v. Colombia. Judgment of September 15, 2005. Series C No. 134, par. 241.