facts offer evidence of the involvement in those facts of two congressmen of the Liberal Party, against which Mr. Escaleras’s party was to compete in the elections. 211. Thus, the Commission believes that the acts of harassment and threats received by Mr. Escaleras arose from his participation as a candidate in the elections and from his work defending human rights and were intended to deny his political participation. Moreover, as in the analysis regarding the right to life, the IACHR believes that the failure to follow up on the lines of investigation related to that motive, which in turn involved state agents, has an impact on the analysis of the State’s responsibility vis-à-vis his political rights. In conclusion, the State of Honduras is internationally responsible for violating Article 23 of the American Convention, in conjunction with Article 1.1 thereof, with respect to Carlos Escaleras Mejía. 3.3. Other claims 212. The Commission notes that the petitioners claim that Carlos Escaleras Mejía’s right of free expression was violated in that his death prevented him from making further environmental denunciations from within his organization and possibly from serving as mayor. The IACHR believes that those arguments are covered by the Commission’s analysis in the sections dealing with the right to freedom of association and political rights. 4. Right to humane treatment (Article 5.1 of the American Convention) 213. Article 5.1 of the American Convention stipulates that “every person has the right to have his physical, mental, and moral integrity respected.” The Court has also ruled that the next of kin of victims in certain human rights violations may, in turn, be considered victims. 295 The Court has ruled that their mental and moral integrity may be violated as a result of the particular circumstances suffered by the victims and of the subsequent acts or omissions of the State authorities in relation to the facts. 296 214. Specifically, in cases such as the one at hand, in which a complete and effective investigation was not carried out, the Court has stated that: (...) the absence of a complete and effective investigation into the facts constitutes a source of additional suffering and anguish for victims and their next of kin, who have the right to know the truth of what happened. This right to the truth requires a procedural determination of the most complete historical truth possible, including the determination of patterns of collective action and of all those who, in different ways, took part in the said violations, as well as their corresponding responsibilities.297 215. Pursuant to the foregoing, the Commission believes that the loss of a loved one in a context like the one described in the case at hand – together with the absence of a complete and effective investigation, which in turn causes suffering and anguish, given that the truth is not known – already represents a violation of the mental and moral integrity of Mr. Escaleras Mejía’s next of kin. 295 I/A Court H. R., Case of Cantoral Huamaní and García Santa Cruz v. Peru, Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations, and Costs, Judgment of July 10, 2007, Series C No. 167, para. 112; and Case of Bueno Alves v. Argentina, Merits, Reparations, and Costs, Judgment of May 11, 2007, Series C No. 164, para. 102. 296 I/A Court H. R., Case of Cantoral Huamaní and García Santa Cruz v. Peru, Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations, and Costs, Judgment of July 10, 2007, Series C No. 167, para. 112; and Case of Vargas Areco v. Paraguay, Judgment of September 26, 2006, Series C No. 155, para. 96. 297 I/A Court H. R., Case of Valle Jaramillo et al. v. Colombia, Merits, Reparations, and Costs, Judgment of November 27, 2008, Series C No. 192, para. 102; Case of the La Rochela Massacre v. Colombia, Merits, Reparations, and Costs, Judgment of May 11, 2007, Series C No. 163, para. 195; Case of Heliodoro Portugal v. Panama, Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs, Judgment of August 12, 2008, Series C No. 186, para. 146; and Case of García Prieto et al. v. El Salvador, Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs, Judgment of November 20, 2007, Series C No. 168, para. 102. 41