48 172. In this chapter, the Court will examine the allegations related to the right to a fair trial and the obligation to carry out effective investigations, in relation with the detention and later forced disappearance of Florencio Chitay Nech. In this regard, the Tribunal affirms its jurisdiction beginning on March 9, 1987, the date on which the adjudicatory jurisdiction of the Court was recognized by the State, to hear the alleged violations. Also, the Court will take into account the context, the facts of the case sub judice and the alleged evidence in the case file in order to determine if Guatemala is responsible for the alleged violation of Articles 8(1) and 25(1) of the American Convention, in relation with Articles 1(1) and 2 of this instrument, and Article I of the ICFDP, which are considered together in this chapter. 1. Context and facts A. Context 173. The Commission alleged that “the facts of the present case are framed within the context of extreme violence and persecution, in which impunity constituted one of the principle mechanisms of a system in whose framework the most indescribable atrocities were committed.” For its part, the representatives highlighted that what occurred in the case of Florencio Chitay Nech and his next of kin “is part of a systematic pattern of impunity.” The State has not denied nor alleged lack of knowledge of this situation. 174. The Court observes that various reports that analyzed the internal conflict in Guatemala and the following situation191 illustrate that the denial of justice and impunity persist, due to the phenomena of terror and intimidations that developed, with cumulative and lasting effects, for which the population did not report the violations of their human rights to the authorities, even when the violence dropped.192 175. During the public hearing, the expert witness Edgar Armando Gutierrez Giron indicated that the next of kin of the victims of armed conflict “are said to still feel persecuted […] because when they had tried to go to the institution, to the headquarters, to the police stations, courts, etc., the next of kin were immediately identified and submitted to a pattern of persecution of threats, harassment, and that this pattern continued for years.” Also, he manifested that “Guatemala still faces a grave problem of impunity, the rate of crime without punishment of crimes against the right to life continues high, with 97% to 98% of impunity,” and that “the first judgment of a case for forced disappearance occurred in December of the year [2009].” 176. Combined with the aforementioned, this Court has stated in recent decisions, that “the undue delay in the judicial system of Guatemala,193 as well as violations of the right to 191 Cf. CEH, Guatemala: Memory of Silence, 1999, supra note 35; CIDH, Fifth Report on the Human Rights Situation in Guatemala, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.III,Doc.21 rev, of 6 of April of 2001 (annexes of the petition, annex 9), and CIDH, Justice and Social Inclusion: the Problems with Democracy in Guatemala, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.118, Doc. 5 rev. 1, 29 of December of 2003 (annexes of the petition, annex 9). 192 Cf. CEH, Guatemala: Memory of Silence, supra note 35, Tome IV, Chapter III, pages 15 and 24, paras. 3899 and 3918; CIDH, Fifth Report on the Human Rights Situation in Guatemala,, supra note 191, paras. 19, 50, 52 and 55, and CIDH, Justice and Social Inclusion: the Problems with Democracy in Guatemala, supra note 191, para. 241. 193 “The system of administration of justice of Guatemala is inefficient in guaranteeing compliance of the law and protection of human rights of victims and family members in almost all of the human rights violations