34 105. This Court has held, in several opportunities that the relatives of the victims of violations of human rights may, in turn, be victims.121 In particular, in cases involving the forced disappearance of persons, it can be understood that the violation of the right to mental and moral integrity of the victims’ next of kin is a direct result, precisely, of this phenomenon, which causes them severe anguish owing to the act itself, which is increased, among other factors, by the constant refusal of the State authorities to provide information on the whereabouts of the victim or to open an effective investigation to clarify what occurred.122 106. The statements of the witnesses, rendered before the Court, show the effects of the forced disappearance. Mr. Félix Vicente Anzualdo Vicuña, father of Kenneth, declared that: Upon the disappearance of my son, the family feeling broke, cracked, there was no more harmony, there was no more understanding [...] it was such a pain, morally speaking, emotionally […]. The thing is that we feel alienated since all the efforts we have made before the State had no effects, everything closes; people do not taken us into account; it would be like the life of my son has no value, that is why we feel alienated […]. [We were happy with the future, but since my son has disappeared, everything has fallen on our faces, there is no better hope.123 107. Regarding Mrs. Iris Isabel Castro Cachay de Anzualdo, mother of Mr. Anzualdo Castro, her daughter, Mrs. Marly Arleny Anzualdo Castro, stated that: When she heard the news that he was taken to the basements, that he was tortured and then, cremated, my mother no longer.... it was like what she said ‘this is it’ [...] her health started to collapse every time a bit more, she started to fade away like a candle, though she went through examinations and she was always told she [...] was okay [...] but at the end [...] she received different treatments, she had a bleeding and later on, they discovered it was a tumor that had turned into cancer and then she was confined to the bed. My father and I had to be with her at every moment […]. She looked at a picture and she had a blunt look and said no more …124. 108. Furthermore, regarding her personal case, Mrs. Marly Arleny declared that: [t]he fact that someone of your family disappears kills you, it breaks you up; it is something that you cannot process in your head; it is there, everyday [...] I would like to talk about what we feel, we, the people who are going through this kind of situations, as if our dignity does not exist…125. 109. The Court has also verified the effects of the stigmatization on the family of Mr. Anzualdo Castro when they were treated as next-of-kin of a terrorist, before and after his disappearance. In that regard, Mrs. Marly Arleny stated: 121 Cf. Case of Bámaca Velásquez V. Guatemala. Merits, supra note 42, para. 160; Case of Cantoral Huamaní and García Santa Cruz V. Perú. Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of July 10, 2007. Series C No. 167, para. 112; and Case of Escué Zapata V. Colombia. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of July 4, 2007. Series C No. 165, para. 77. 122 Cf. Case of Blake V. Guatemala. Merits, supra note 42, para. 114; Case of Ticona Estrada V. Bolivia, supra note 63, para. 87; and Case of La Cantuta V. Perú, supra note 58, para. 123. 123 Statement rendered by Félix Vicente Anzualdo Vicuña at the public hearing held before the Court on April 2, 2009. 124 Statement rendered by Marly Arleny Anzualdo Castro at the public hearing held before the InterAmerican Court on April 2, 2009. 125 Statement rendered by Marly Arleny Anzualdo Castro at the public hearing held before the InterAmerican Court on April 2, 2009.