78 197. In its final arguments, the Commission alleged that, as a result of the disappearance of Bámaca Velásquez, the State violated the right to the truth of the next of kin of the victim and of society as a whole. In this respect, the Commission declared that the right to the truth has a collective nature, which includes the right of society to “have access to essential information for the development of democratic systems”, and a particular nature, as the right of the victims' next of kin to know what happened to their loved ones, which permits a form of reparation. The InterAmerican Court has established the obligation of the State to investigate the facts while there is uncertainty about the fate of the person who has disappeared, and the need to provide a simple and prompt recourse in the case, with due guarantees. Following this interpretation, the Commission stated that this is a right of society and that it is emerging as a principle of international law under the dynamic interpretation of human rights treaties and, specifically, Articles 1(1), 8, 25 and 13 of the American Convention. 198. The State limited its defense to stating that “it has still not been possible to identify the persons or person criminally responsible for the unlawful acts against Mr. Bámaca [Velásquez] and, thus, clarify his disappearance” and, consequently, it did not put forward any defense in relation to the alleged violation of the right to the truth, either at the procedural opportunity of the answer to the application or in its final arguments. * * * 199. The Court has already transcribed Articles 8 and 25 of the Convention in this Judgment (supra 184 and 185). Article 1(1), will be transcribed in the following chapter (infra 205). 200. As has already been established in this judgment (supra 196), several judicial remedies were attempted in this case to identify the whereabouts of Bámaca Velásquez. Not only were these remedies ineffective but, furthermore, high-level State agents exercised direct actions against them in order to prevent them from having positive results. These obstructions were particularly evident with regard to the many exhumation procedures that were attempted; to date, these have not permitted the remains of Efraín Bámaca Velásquez to be identified (supra 121 m). It is undeniable that this situation has prevented Jennifer Harbury and the victim's next of kin from knowing the truth about what happened to him. 201. Nevertheless, in the circumstances of the instant case, the right to the truth is subsumed in the right of the victim or his next of kin to obtain clarification of the facts relating to the violations and the corresponding responsibilities from the competent State organs, through the investigation and prosecution established in Articles 8 and 25 of the Convention. 202. Therefore, this issue is resolved in accordance with the findings in the previous chapter, in relation to judicial guarantees and judicial protection. XVII FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH ARTICLE 1(1) IN RELATION TO ARTICLE 3 COMMON TO THE GENEVA CONVENTIONS (OBLIGATION TO RESPECT RIGHTS)