19 61. In their brief containing pleadings and motions, CEJIL and IDHUCA alleged that the State violated the right to life to the detriment of Ramón Mauricio García Prieto based on two findings: a) the State favored the conditions for the creation and consolidation of the death squads, which were responsible for the execution, and b) the State did not fully investigate the events surrounding the death of Mr. García Prieto. The Commission and the State did not specifically refer to this allegation. 62. This Tribunal already established that its jurisdiction only extends to those events which occurred subsequent to June 6, 1995, which is the date on which the State recognized the jurisdiction of the Court. (supra paras. 44 and 45). Moreover, each party has recognized that the death of Ramón Mauricio García Prieto occurred on June 10, 1994, and as a result, this event lies outside the temporal jurisdiction of the Court (supra para. 42). In the present case, the Tribunal is impeded from considering the alleged violation of the obligation to respect Article 4 of the Convention as alleged by the common intervener. VIII ARTICLES 5 (RIGHT TO HUMANE TREATMENT),30 8(1) (RIGHT TO A FAIR TRIAL)31 AND 25(1) (RIGHT TO JUDICIAL PROTECTION)32 IN RELATION WITH ARTICLE 1(1) (OBLIGATION TO RESPECT RIGHTS) OF THE AMERICAN CONVENTION 1. Identification of the victims 63. Prior to the examination of the alleged violations in this section, this Tribunal deems it is appropriate to identify the individuals who will be considered the alleged victims in the present case. 64. This Court observes that in the Commission’s Report on Merits No. 94/05, it concluded that the victims were Ramón Mauricio García Prieto, José Mauricio García Prieto Hirlemann, Gloria Giralt de García Prieto, and Carmen Alicia Estrada. In the application submitted to the Court by the Commission, it indicated that the victims would be the same individuals named in its Report on Merits, with the exception of Ramón Mauricio García Prieto (supra para. 5). In the proceedings before the Court two briefs containing pleadings and motions were submitted. In one of them, CEJIL 30 Article 5(1) (Right to Humane Treatment) establishes that: 1. Every person has the right to have his physical, mental, and moral integrity respected. 31 Article 8(1) (Right to a Fair Trial) of the Convention establishes: [e]very person has the right to a hearing, with due guarantees and within a reasonable time, by a competent, independent, and impartial tribunal, previously established by law, in the substantiation of any accusation of a criminal nature made against him or for the determination of his rights and obligations of a civil, labor, fiscal, or any other nature. 32 Article 25(1) (Right to Judicial Protection) of the Convention establishes that: [e]veryone has the right to simple and prompt recourse, or any other effective recourse, to a competent court or tribunal for protection against acts that violate his fundamental rights recognized by the constitution or laws of the state concerned or by this Convention, even though such violation may have been committed by persons acting in the course of their official duties.