evidence “despite being introduced in a timely fashion, were not examined.” Based on the foregoing, it determined that the judgment was flawed, therefore, because of a “failure to provide reasoning.”85 3. Second judicial proceedings 77. The IACHR does not have any information about the status of said case as of the date of the drafting of the instant report. Based on the latest information provided by the State, on April 10, 2013, it was noted that the case is before the Second Trial Court of the Criminal Judicial Circuit of the State of Aragua, under case file No. 2J-1706-12 and no record appears of any challenge to the Court of Appeals of this same judicial district.86 Based on the available information, the Commission will now carry out its analysis with the understanding that this process is still pending. V. LEGAL ANALYSIS 78. The Commission shall analyze the positions of the parties and the facts established in the following order: (A) The rights to life, humane treatment, and to personal liberty, with respect to the events that occurred on January 6, 2003; (B) The rights to a fair trial and judicial protection with respect to the domestic proceedings; and (C) The right to humane treatment with respect to the relatives of the three alleged victims. A. The rights to life,87 humane treatment,88 and personal liberty89 1. General considerations on the use of force by agents of the state and the rights to humane treatment and personal liberty 79. The Commission has repeatedly asserted that the right to life is a prerequisite for the enjoyment of all other human rights, without the respect thereof, all other rights are meaningless.90 As such, compliance with Article 4, in connection with Article 1.1 of the American Convention, does not only presuppose that no person can be arbitrarily deprived of his or her life, but also requires that the States adopt any and all necessary measures to protect and preserve the right to life, pursuant to their obligation to guarantee the full and free exercise of human rights of all individuals under their jurisdiction.91 For its part, the European Court has highlighted the importance that the right to life be interpreted and applied so as to make its safeguards practical and effective.92 85 Annex 44. Decision of Temporary Chamber No. 66 of the Court of Appeals of the Criminal Judicial Circuit of the State of Aragua. Case No. 1As/6691-01. December 14, 2011. Annex to State’s submission of April 10, 2013. 86 State’s submission of April 10, 2003. Annex 43. Official Letter No. 1530-12. Court of Appeals. Criminal Judicial Circuit of the State of Aragua. October 18, 2012. Annex to State’s submission of April 10, 2013. 87 Article 4(1) of the American Convention provides that: 1. Every person has the right to have his life respected. This right shall be protected by law and, in general, from the moment of conception. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his life. 88 Article 5(1) of the American Convention provides that: 1. Every person has the right to have his physical, mental, and moral integrity respected. 89 Article 7 of the American Convention states: 1. Every person has the right to personal liberty and Security. 90 IACHR, Case 12.270, Report No. 2/15, Merits, Johan Alexis Ortiz Hernández, Venezuela, January 29, 2015, par. 185. 91 CIDH, Case 12.270, Report No. 2/15, Merits, Johan Alexis Ortiz Hernández, Venezuela, January 29, 2015, par. 186. Also, see: IA Court of HR. Case of Zambrano Vélez et al v. Ecuador. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of July 4, 2007. Series C No. 166, par. 80. 92 ECHR, Case McCann and others v. The United Kingdom. Application No. 27229/95, 27 September 1995, § 146. 20