58 6. In accordance with the terms of Article 1, the States Parties shall take effective measures to prevent and punish torture within their jurisdiction. The States Parties shall ensure that all acts of torture and attempts to commit torture are offenses under their criminal law and shall make such acts punishable by severe penalties that take into account their serious nature. The States Parties likewise shall take effective measures to prevent and punish other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment within their jurisdiction. […] 8. The States Parties shall guarantee that any person making an accusation of having been subjected to torture within their jurisdiction shall have the right to an impartial examination of his case. Likewise, if there is an accusation or well-grounded reason to believe that an act of torture has been committed within their jurisdiction, the States Parties shall guarantee that their respective authorities will proceed properly and immediately to conduct an investigation into the case and to initiate, whenever appropriate, the corresponding criminal process. After all the domestic legal procedures of the respective State and the corresponding appeals have been exhausted, the case may be submitted to the international fora whose competence has been recognized by that State. 134. In the case of the victims who were deprived of the right to life, with the exception of Mr. Chinchilla, the autopsies reliably revealed signs of torture (tying, beating, etc). imputable to the State for the same reason that their deaths are attributable to it (supra, para. 120). Let it be said, moreover, that the victims were killed by stab wounds to the neck and thorax which increased their suffering, and in some cases they were even decapitated. This was a pattern and common denominator in most of the murders connected with the instant Case (supra, para. 93). 135. With regard to the other victims who were placed at the disposal of the judicial authorities, the Court notes that in the case of the Mr. Vásquez and Mr. AngáritaRamírez, the medical examiner found injuries, grazes and bruises attesting to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment while they were in detention. Concerning the other persons, Ms. Torres-Gil, Mr. Montes-Letona and Mr. Montenegro, the Court considers that there is insufficient evidence, although some of them claimed to have been subjected to such treatment. 136. Consequently, the Court finds that Guatemala violated Article 5 (1) and 5 (2) of the American Convention and the obligations set forth in Articles 1, 6 and 8 of the Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture, to the detriment of Ms. Ana Elizabeth Paniagua-Morales, Mr. Julián Salomón Gómez-Ayala, Mr. William Otilio González-Rivera, Mr. Pablo Corado-Barrientos, Mr. Manuel de Jesús González-López, Mr. Augusto Angárita-Ramírez and Mr. Oscar Vásquez. XIV VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 8 137. The Commission alleged that Guatemala violated the right to a fair trial in failing to respect the right of the victims and their relatives to be heard by a competent, independent and impartial judge or tribunal in order to establish their rights. According to the Commission, owing to Judge Trejo’s kidnapping and the threats he received, he could not fulfill the requirements established in Article 8 of the American Convention, as proven by the succession of events in the instant Case. The Commission considered it the duty of the State to ensure the existence of effective