55 Convention obliges the State to guarantee to every individual access to the administration of justice and, in particular, to simple and prompt recourse, so that, inter alia, those responsible for human rights violations may be prosecuted and reparations obtained for the damages suffered. Article 25 “is one of the fundamental pillars not only of the American Convention, but of the very rule of law in a democratic society” That article is closely linked to Article 8(1), which provides that every person has the right to a 296 hearing, with due guarantees, for the determination of his rights, whatever their nature. 292. Similarly, the Court has held that: According to the American Convention, States parties are obliged to provide effective judicial remedies for the victims of human rights violations (article 25), remedies that must be substantiated in accordance with the rules of due process (article 8.1), all within the general obligation of States to guarantee the free and full exercise of the rights recognized by the Convention for all persons 297 within their jurisdiction (article 1.1). 293. Accordingly, States have a duty to investigate human rights violations in a serious manner, identifying those responsible, making reparations to the victims, and taking measures to avoid impunity, which the Court has defined as “the total lack of investigation, prosecution, capture, trial and 298 conviction of those responsible for violations of the rights protected by the American Convention” . In this respect, the Court has held that the American Convention guarantees every person’s right of access to justice to enforce his rights, and it is incumbent on the State to prevent, identify, try, and punish the 299 perpetrators and the persons responsible for the cover-up of human rights violations. 294. According to the corpus juris of international law, a crime against humanity is in itself a grave violation of human rights and affects mankind as a whole. In Almonacid Arellano et al vs. Chile the Court recognized that crimes against humanity include inhuman acts, such as murder, committed in the 300 context of a generalized or systematic assault on the civilian population. 295. The Commission wishes to point out that in its analysis of this chapter it must take into account the particular gravity of the facts. Through the massacres perpetrated in this case, members of the Salvadoran army committed crimes against humanity and violated mandatory rules of international law, making it all the more urgent to activate the means, instruments and mechanisms for effective prosecution of such conduct and the punishment of its perpetrators, in order to avoid impunity. To establish the full scope of the international responsibility of the State given the nature of the proven events, the Commission, observing the principle that iura novit curia (“the court knows the law”), will offer 301 considerations with respect to the Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture and the Inter-American Convention for the Prevention, Punishment and Eradication of Violence against Women, 302 the “Convention of Belém do Pará” . On this point, the Court has held that “such provisions specify and complement the obligations of the State to respect the rights enshrined in the American Convention as 303 well as the international corpus juris dealing with protection of personal integrity”. 296 I-A Court, Loayza Tamayo vs. Peru. Judgment of 27 November 1998. Series C No. 42, Para. 169 297 I-A Court, Masacres de Ituango vs. Colombia. Judgment of 1 July 2006. Series C No. 148, Para. 287 298 See I-A Court, Gómez Paquiyauri Brothers vs. Peru. Judgment of 8 July 2004. Series C No. 110, Para. 148; “19 Merchants”vs. Colombia. Judgment of 5 July 2004. Series C No. 109, Para. 175; and Bámaca Velásquez vs. Guatemala. Judgment of 22 February 2002. Series C No. 91, Para. 64 299 I-A Court, Myrna Mack Chang vs. Guatemala. Judgment of 25 November 2003. Series C Nº 101, Para. 275; Juan Humberto Sánchez vs. Honduras. Judgment of 7 June 2003, Series C NO. 99, Para. 186; Blake vs. Guatemala, Judgment of 22 January 1999, Series C Nº 48, Para. 65 300 I-A Court, Almonacid Arellano et al. vs. Chile. Judgment of 26 September 2006. Series C No. 154, Para. 96 301 The State of El Salvador ratified the Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture on December 5, 1994 302 The State of El Salvador ratified the Convention of Belém do Pará on January 26, 1996. 303 I-A Court, Masacre de las Dos Erres vs. Guatemala. Judgment of 24 November 2009. Series C No. 211, Para. 137 and Penal Miguel Castro Castro vs. Peru, Judgment of 25 November 2006. Series C No. 160. paras. 276, 377 and 379