B. Legal analysis 105. The petitioners claimed that what happened to Mayra Angelina Gutiérrez matches the definition of forced disappearance and they argued that several of the hypotheses as to motive, particularly the one that her disappearance had to do with her active involvement with guerrilla groups during the armed conflict and the one concerning her role as a researcher in the area of irregular adoptions, involve state officials. Before commencing its legal analysis, the Commission notes that, as the established facts indeed show, since the beginning of the investigations multiple theories have emerged about what befell Ms. Gutiérrez, which involve various actors, including state agents. In such circumstances, the Commission considers it appropriate to analyze, first, the domestic investigations and proceedings in connection with Ms. Gutiérrez's disappearance in light of the duty to investigate, particularly the specific obligations in cases where forced disappearance alleged, before pronouncing on whether or not, based on information available, the state violated the other rights under dispute. 1. 106. Right to a fair trial and judicial protection (Articles 8, 25, and 1(1) of the American Convention and Article I(b) of the Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearance of Persons) Article 8(1) of the American Convention provides: Every 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. 107. For its part, Article 25(1) of the Convention stipulates: Everyone 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. 108. Article I(b) of the Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearance of Persons provides that: The States Parties to this Convention undertake: (…) b. To punish within their jurisdictions, those persons who commit or attempt to commit the crime of forced disappearance of persons and their accomplices and accessories. 109. According to the consistent case law of the organs of the inter-American system, as a result of the protection granted by Articles 8 and 25 of the Convention, the States are obliged to provide effective judicial recourses to the victims of human rights violations that must be substantiated in accordance with the rules of due process of law.157 Furthermore, the Court has held that the right of access to justice should ensure, within a reasonable time, the right of the alleged victims or their next of kin to have everything necessary done to learn the truth about what happened and to investigate, try and, as appropriate, punish 157 I/A Court H.R., Case of Rodríguez Vera et al. (Persons Disappeared from the Palace of Justice) v. Colombia. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of November 14, 2014. Series C No. 287, par. 435, citing Cf. Velásquez Rodríguez Case v. Honduras. Preliminary Objections. Judgment of June 26, 1987. Series C No. 1, par. 91; and Case of Human Rights Defender et al. v. Guatemala. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of August 28, 2014. Series C No. 283, par. 199. 22