the opportunity, to participate in the conduct of public affairs. 176 Thus, the State is responsible for adopting effective measures to guarantee the conditions needed for its full exercise.177 143. As established in the evidence, Mr. Ángel Pacheco León won the primaries of the National Party in order to be elected congressperson to the National Congress of Honduras. The final elections were to be held on November 25, 2001, two days before he was killed. 144. The IACHR notes that, after winning the primaries, which occurred two weeks before his death, Mr. Pacheco was the victim of various pressures and death threats made by various persons so that he would withdraw his candidacy to the elections for the National Congress. The Commission notes that, according to the evidence, both persons involved with the National Party and those involved in the political party that competed against the former, demanded that Mr. Pacheco not participate in the elections. Therefore, the IACHR considers that there are clues that directly connect the origin of the threats received by Mr. Pacheco and his subsequent death with his position as a National Party candidate in the elections for the National Congress. 145. Furthermore, the Commission observes that, according to the evidence, there are enough elements, which have not been disproven by the State on the basis of a serious diligent investigation, that would make it possible to infer the participation in said events of at least four state agents, including one mayor, two congresspersons, and a police officer. 146. Because of the above, the Commission believes that body of evidence not investigated by the State makes it possible to conclude that said acts of harassment and threats received by Mr. Pacheco had their origin in his participation as a candidate in the congressional elections to the National Congress of Honduras. In view of this, the IACHR deems that, along the same line of analysis regarding the right to life, the absence of any follow-up on the lines of inquiry related to this motive, which also involved state agents, has an impact on the review of the State's responsibility with regard to political rights. In short, the State of Honduras bears international responsibility for violating Article 23 of the American Convention, in connection with Article 1.1 of the same instrument, to the detriment of Ángel Pacheco León. 4. Right to personal integrity (Article 5.1 of the American Convention) 147. The Commission takes note that the petitioners alleged the violation of the right to personal integrity of the Ángel Pacheco's next of kin in the stage of the merits. Regarding this, on the basis of the review conducted previously (see paragraphs 121 and 122 above), the IACHR shall set forth its considerations about this matter. 148. Article 5.1 of the American Convention establishes that “[e]very person has the right to have his physical, mental, and moral integrity respected.” 178 With respect to the next of kin of the victims of certain human rights violations, the Court has indicated that their mental and moral integrity can be affected as a consequence of specific situations that the victims suffered and the subsequent actions or omissions by domestic authorities in the face of these events.179 176 I/A Court H.R., Case of Luna López v. Honduras. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of October 10, 2013. Series C No. 269, para. 142; Case of Chitay Nech et al. v. Guatemala. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of May 25, 2010, Series C No. 212, para. 107. 177 I/A Court H.R., Case of Yatama v. Nicaragua. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of June 23, 2005. Series C No. 127, para. 201. 178 I/A Court H.R., Case of Cantoral-Huamaní and García-Santa Cruz v. Peru. Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of July 10, 2007. Series C No. 167. para. 112; and Case of Vargas Areco v. Paraguay. Judgment of September 26, 2006. Series C No. 155. para. 96. 179 I/A Court H.R., Case of Cantoral-Huamaní and García-Santa Cruz v. Peru. Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of July 10, 2007. Series C No. 167. para. 112; and Case of Vargas Areco v. Paraguay. Judgment of September 26, 2006. Series C No. 155. para. 96.