113 [t]he pattern has always been that when a judicial step is going to be taken, there is always a threat. For example, once they entered the house, they went around the entire house, they asked for my family’s passports, they left and they did not steal anything. Phone calls, obviously. Recently, last year, a high official called me to tell me that there was an attack against me, that was when the Court ordered the provisional measures. Recently, the security forces themselves have detected following by vehicles with suspicious drivers around the Foundation and my house. They have attempted to link my brother to drug trafficking, and they even began a trial. There have also been other accusations brought against me. For example, for having exposed the clandestine groups, merely based on an opinion in the press where I had a report coming from the police, an anonymous report coming from the National Civil Police, giving all the names of policemen who were under the orders of one of the accused, Juan Guillermo Oliva Carrera. And this was enough for a lawsuit against me, aside from other threats trying to accuse me of other types of things. […] I believe that it is mostly living with great anxiety, uncertainty. The State has resorted very much to psychological warfare. Even the motion by the State at this Court is one more tactic, more psychological warfare. I have the Agent of the State here whom I can say was a witness in my case, in my favor, and now they want to set him against me, using the same delay tactics that they have used within the country. They always want to play this game precisely with the people who are near me, to break me, emotionally and psychologically, so that I will not be able to go on. Within my family, I think that we have each lived an individual process to avoid breaking down as a family and to remain firm in this struggle to attain justice which has become a paradigmatic case, not only for the family but also because I think that I feel the weight on my back on many Guatemalans who see themselves reflected in this case because they have been unable to attain justice, it is quite a heavy weight that has obviously forced me to give up my personal life, to spend all my time and to be able to represent, in a dignified manner, the thousands of victims who had no opportunity, because every day they come up to me and urge me to go on. I have to go on with this case. 231. As a consequence of the statements by Lucrecia Hernández Mack and Helen Mack Chang during the public hearing held on February 21, 2003 before the Court, the latter decided to order the State to expand the measures as required to safeguard the life and the right to humane treatment of the next of kin of Myrna Mack Chang, who are: Zoila Chang Lau, the mother; Marco Mack Chang, brother; Freddy Mack Chang, brother; Vivian Mack Chang, sister; Ronald Chang Apuy, cousin; Lucrecia Hernández Mack, daughter; and the latter’s children (supra para. 61). 232. It has been proven, therefore, in the sub judice case, that there was a violation of the right to humane treatment of the next of kin of the victim as a direct consequence of the threats and harassment that they have suffered from the start of the investigation of the extra-legal execution of Myrna Mack Chang. This situation was worsened by the pattern of obstruction of the aforementioned investigations, the murder of a police investigator, the threats and harassment suffered by some of the legal operators, policemen, and witnesses, which forced them into exile. Said circumstances, made more severe by the long time that has passed without elucidation of the facts, has caused constant anguish among the next of kin of the victim, together with feelings of frustration and powerlessness and a deep fear of suffering the same pattern of violence fostered by the State.272 For this reason, the 272 Cf. Juan Humberto Sánchez Case, supra note 9, para. 101; Bámaca Velásquez Case, supra note 250, para. 160; and Blake Case. Judgment of January 24, 1998. Series C No. 36, para. 114.