Ecuador violated the right to truth, derived from Articles 8(1), 13(1), and 25(1) of the American Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) of the same instrument, to the detriment of the relatives of Fredy Núñez Naranjo. VII.3 RIGHT TO HUMANE TREATMENT156 A. Arguments of the Commission and the parties 121. The Commission stated that the forced disappearance of the alleged victim has generated a deep sense of pain, anguish, and uncertainty in their relatives, which has been worsened by violations of due process and judicial protection, "including their long search for justice, [... the lack] of clarification about what [... happened] [to] their loved one" and the absence of "procedure[s ... ] to provide them with protection" against threats received from the parents of Fredy Núñez Naranjo, "as a consequence of their search for justice." According to the Commission, constitutes a violation of the right to humane treatment, established in Article 5(1), in relation to the obligations provided for in Article 1(1) of the same instrument, to the detriment of the relatives of Fredy Núñez Naranjo identified in the Merits report. 122. In their final written arguments, the representatives agreed that the State violated Article 5 in relation to 1(1) of the Convention to the detriment of the relatives of Fredy Núñez Naranjo. 123. The State opposed the alleged violation. In this regard, he noted that he made the necessary judicial remedies available to the relatives of Fredy Núñez Naranjo to carry out the criminal proceedings and arranged mechanisms allowing them to participate, ensuring their procedural guarantees and access to the justice system. 124. Regarding the alleged threats against the relatives of Fredy Núñez Naranjo, it was noted that, even though they did not file any complaint and "it has not been possible to prove the existence of a threat context that limited their right to access justice and that can be attributed to the Ecuadorian State,” as a precaution, the mechanism of the National System for Protection and Assistance to Victims, Witnesses and Other Participants in the Criminal Process (SPAVT) of the Prosecutor General was activated, and since October 2020, they have been under protection.157 B. Considerations of the Court 125. On numerous occasions, this Court has cautioned that the family of the victims of certain human rights violations may, in turn, also be considered as victims, because of the suffering caused by the violations committed against their loved ones or due to later acts or omissions on the part of State authorities.158 In this regard, in cases of forced disappearance, the Court has observed that uncertainty surrounding the whereabouts of loved ones is one of the main sources of psychological and moral suffering for the relatives of disappeared victims.159 In addition, according to the Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances, "[e]nforced 156 Cf. Article 5(1) of the American Convention in relation to Article 1(1) of the same instrument. Cf. Report No. FGE-DNSPAVT-2023-021 issued by the Prosecutor General's Office on February 2, 2023 (case file of evidence, page 1796). 157 158 Cf. Case of Blake v. Guatemala. Merits. Judgment of January 24, 1998. Series C No. 36, para. 114, and Case of Flores Bedregal et al. v. Bolivia, supra, para. 159. 159 Cf. Case of Isaza Uribe et al. v. Colombia, supra, para. 165, and Case of Movilla Galarcio et al. v. Colombia, supra, para. 173. -35-