guarantee human rights, so that both facets of international responsibility converge and apply in the instant case. 4.2.2 Attribution of responsibility for what happened on December 12, 2002 153. The State has indicated that school authorities cannot provide the same assistance as a clinic in such a grave emergency. However, the Commission notes that no public servant at the school responded promptly to the situation after learning, on December 12, that Paola had swallowed white phosphorus pellets. Thus, from the statements cited in the foregoing section regarding the events on December 12, the Commission highlights the fact that, when he heard about the pellets, Dr. Raúl David Ortega decided that it was very late and there was nothing to be done; instead of calling an ambulance immediately to attempt a transfer to a health center that did have the resources to respond to Paola's situation, that doctor deemed it more of a priority to apprise the Vice Principal and the Inspector General, Luz Arellano de Azán, of the situation. For her part, upon learning what had happened, the Inspector General deemed it necessary to get Paola to start praying and "ask God's forgiveness" while the Vice Principal just asked for the reasons why she had decided to swallow the pellets. Thus none of the three public servants took the necessary steps to have Paola immediately driven to a hospital to receive the emergency treatment she needed. From statements made by Paola's classmates, it transpires that the three public servants waited for her mother to arrive and for her to look after Paola's transfer to hospital, thereby losing at least 30 minutes that might have saved her life. 154. Consequently, the Commission concludes that the same Vice Principal, the doctor, and the school inspector all failed to adopt the measures needed to respond to the serious emergency situation in which Paola found herself on December 12, 2002 after swallowing the pellets known as "diablillos". Accordingly, the acts and omissions of these public servants, who had the added duty of caring for Paola in a school environment, contributed to the victim's demise, thereby making the State also internationally responsible for what happened that day. 5. Conclusion 155. In light of all the considerations detailed in this section, the Commission concludes that the Ecuadorian State is responsible for violation of the rights to life, humane treatment, honor and dignity, special protection of the State for a girl, equality and nondiscrimination, education, health, and a life free from violence, established in Articles 4.1, 5.1, 11, 19, 24, and 26 of the American Convention on Human Rights in conjunction with the obligations to respect and guarantee human rights set forth in Article 1.1 of that same instrument; in Article 13 of the Protocol of San Salvador, and Articles 7.a and 7.b of the Inter-American Convention to Prevent, Punish, and Eradicate Violence against Women (Convention of Belém do Pará), all to the detriment of Paola del Rosario Guzmán Albarracín. B. The right to judicial guarantees 173 , judicial protection 174 , and equality and nondiscrimination (Articles 8.1, 25.1, and 24 of the American Convention and Article 7 of the Convention of Belem do Pará) 1. General considerations 156. That Commission has stressed that the obligation of the States to act with due diligence includes enabling access to suitable and effective remedies when human rights are violated. 175 The Commission has further established that Article 25 of the American Convention relates directly to Article 8.1 , Article 8.1. 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. 174 Article 25. 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. 175 IACHR, Access to Justice for Women Victims of Violence in the Americas, OEA/Ser. L/V/II. doc.68, January 20, 2007. 173