90 241. Moreover, the Court considered that the violation of the right to integrity of the next of kin is also due to the lack of effective investigations to ascertain the facts, the lack of initiatives to punish those responsible, the lack of information regarding the facts, and in general, in regard to the impunity that remains in the case, which has generated feelings of frustration, impotence, and anguish.355 In particular, in cases that involve enforced disappearances of persons, it is possible to understand that the violation of the right to psychological and moral integrity of the next of kin of the victims is a direct consequence of this phenomenon that causes severe suffering, which tends to increase, among other factors, given the constant failure of the State authorities to offer information regarding the whereabouts of the victims or to initiate an effective investigation in order to ascertain information on what occurred.356 242. The Court finds that the uncertainty and lack of information from the State about what occurred, which remains to date in a large sense, has been a source of suffering and anguish, and of a feeling of insecurity, frustration, and helplessness for the next of kin, given the failure of the public authorities to investigate the facts.357 Similarly, the Court noted that before the enforced disappearance of persons, the State has the obligation to guarantee the right to personal integrity of the next of kin also by means of effective investigations. These effects, fully encompassed in the complexity of enforced disappearances, remain in existence while the verified factors of impunity persist.358 243. Consequently, despite the initiatives carried out by the State via Law No. 9.140/95, the compensation ordered to some of the next of kin of the victims,359 and the advances carried out by the Special Commission, among others, the Court considers that the State violated the right to personal integrity established in Article 5 of the American Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) of the same instrument, to the detriment of the following individuals: Zélia Eustáquio Fonseca (mother), Alzira Costa Reis360 (mother and wife), Victória Lavínia Grabois Olímpio361 (daughter and wife), Criméia Alice Schmidt de Almeida (partner) and João Carlos Schmidt de Almeida (son), Luiza Monteiro Teixeira (mother), João Lino da Costa (father), Benedita Pinto Castro (mother), Odila Mendes Pereira (mother) and José Pereira (father), Luiza Gurjão Farias362 (mother), Junília 355 Cf. Statements rendered by the indicated alleged victims and the expert psychological report of Mr. Paulo César Endo, supra note 350, folios 2262 to 2283. 356 Cf. Case of Blake. Merits, supra note 340, para. 114; Case of Chitay Nech et al., supra note 25, para. 220, and Case of Ibsen Cárdenas and Ibsen Peña, supra note 24, para. 126. 357 Cf. Case of Blake. Merits, supra note 340, para. 114; Case of Heliodoro Portugal, supra note 23, para. 174, and Case of Kawas Fernández, supra note 188, para. 139. 358 Cf. Case of Goiburú et al., supra note 130, para. 103; Case of Radilla Pacheco, supra note 24, para. 172, and Case of Chitay Nech et al., supra note 25, para. 226. 359 Cf. Statement by Mrs. Valeria Costa de Couto rendered before a public notary, supra note 344, folio 1726; Statement by Mrs. Maristella Nurchis rendered before a public notary, supra note 344, folio 1686; Statement by Mr. João Carlos Schmidt de Almeida Grabois rendered before a public notary, (case file on the merits, tome IV, folio 1657), and Statement by Mrs. Rosana de Moura Momente rendered before a public notary (case file on the merits, tome IV, folio 1690). 360 Mrs. Alzira Costa Reis is also the wife and mother of two disappeared persons of the Guerrilha do Araguaia, Messers. Maurício Grabois and André Grabois, respectively. 361 Mrs. Victória Lavínia Grabois Olímpio is, likewise, sister of one of the disappeared persons of the Guerrilha de Araguaia, Mr. André Grabois. 362 The representatives reported in their brief of April 20, that Mrs. Luíza Gurjão Farias did not make a statement before the public notary given that “she passed away on February 21, 2010, before