52 ARTICLES 8(1) (RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL)161 AND 25(1) (JUDICIAL PROTECTION),162 IN RELATION WITH ARTICLES 1(1) (OBLIGATION TO RESPECT RIGHTS) AND 2163 (DOMESTIC LEGAL EFFECTS) OF THE AMERICAN CONVENTION AND ARTICLES I, SUBPARAGRAPHS A) AND B), IX, AND XIX164 OF THE INTERAMERICAN CONVENTION ON FORCED DISAPPEARANCE 173. In the present chapter the Tribunal will examine the arguments regarding the right to a fair trial and the obligation to carry out effective investigations, in relation to the arrest and subsequent forced disappearance of Mr. Rosendo Radilla-Pacheco. In first term, the Court will analyze the lack of diligent and effective investigations within the ordinary justice system. Later, the Tribunal will assess the application of military jurisdiction in the present case. 174. Before referring to those aspects, it is appropriate to mention that the State requested that the Tribunal “[e]specially assess the diligences carried out by the National Human Rights Commission within the investigation in different cases of alleged forced disappearances occurred in the seventies and eighties.” In that sense, the State referred specifically to the investigation carried out by said organization regarding the specific case. 175. The Tribunal observes that, according to that indicated by the State, the National Human Rights Commission is an “organization of constitutional status” that is part of the “national non-jurisdictional system for the protection of human rights” with the power “[t]o 161 Article 8(1) states that: 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. 162 Article 25(1) states that: 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. 163 Article 2 states that: Where the exercise of any of the rights or freedoms referred to in Article 1 is not already ensured by legislative or other provisions, the States Parties undertake to adopt, in accordance with their constitutional processes and the provisions of this Convention, such legislative or other measures as may be necessary to give effect to those rights or freedoms. 164 Article IX states, in what is relevant, that: Persons alleged to be responsible for the acts constituting the offense of forced disappearance of persons may be tried only in the competent jurisdictions of ordinary law in each state, to the exclusion of all other special jurisdictions, particularly military jurisdictions. The acts constituting forced disappearance shall not be deemed to have been committed in the course of military duties. Article XIX states that: The states may express reservations with regard to this Convention when adopting, signing, ratifying or acceding to it, unless such reservations are incompatible with the object and purpose of the Convention and as long as they refer to one or more specific provisions.