77 137. The representatives of the alleged victim argued that as a consequence of the violation of the rights protected by Articles 4, 5, 7, 8 and 25 of the American Convention, the State also breached Article 1(1) of the Convention, which sets forth the duty to respect the rights and liberties embodied in the Convention and to ensure and guarantee the free and full exercise of said rights by all persons under the jurisdiction of the State. Therefore, the State has the duty to organize the apparatus of government and all structures through which public authority is exercised, in such a manner that they are able to juridically ensure the free and full exercise of human rights. The above also entails the juridical duty of the States to prevent, investigate, and punish all violations of rights protected by the American Convention. 138. With respect to Article 2 of the American Convention, the representatives alleged that the State has not adopted the appropriate domestic legal measures to make the rights protected by the Convention effective. For example, the Honduran Criminal Code does not define the crime of forced disappearance. Furthermore, there are serious shortcomings in the practice of habeas corpus, which make it an ineffective remedy. On the other hand, numerous irregularities have been identified in implementation of habeas corpus, such as delays in processing requests filed before the courts and ineffectiveness of the serving judge. Pleadings of the Commission 139. The Inter-American Commission alleged that the State is responsible for violation of its obligation to ensure free and full exercise of the rights recognized by the Convention, set forth in Article 1(1) of that Convention, as well as for not fulfilling its duty, derived from said provision, to prevent, investigate with all means available to it, punish, and ensure adequate reparation to the victim and his next of kin. In addition, the Commission pointed out that the State has not used all the means available to it, in a diligent manner, to conduct a serious and effective investigation within a reasonable time, as the basis for indictment, elucidation of the facts, trial and punishment of the direct perpetrators and those who instigated them. Pleadings of the State 140. The State deemed that it has not violated international obligations or rights and guarantees protected by the American Convention, for which reason it “rejects any claim to declare the Honduran State responsible in the instant case,” as it has, instead, acted within a legal and constitutional framework and in accordance with the international treaties in force. Considerations of the Court 141. In previous chapters, the Court has established the violation of the rights protected by Articles 7, 5, 4, 8 and 25 (supra 88, 103, 113 and 136) in combination with Article 1(1) of the Convention to the detriment of Juan Humberto Sánchez and of his next of kin. In addition, given the consequences of said violations, the Court deems it pertinent to consider the scope of the general obligation of the State embodied in Article 1(1) of the American Convention.