235. In the case of the violation of Article 25 of the American Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) thereof, the Commission argued as follows:
a) this article was violated to the detriment of the juveniles interned in the Center in the period between August 14, 1996 and July 25, 2001;
b) the juveniles did not have a simple and prompt recourse to competent judges or courts in the event that their physical, mental and moral integrity, liberty or security was in danger in a juvenile Reeducation Institute;
c) the petition of habeas corpus filed on their behalf and granted, was paralyzed for two years, reviewed and then delayed for another year before a ruling was issued, which meant that they did not obtain the “brief and summary” finding that Paraguay’s Constitution requires;
d) the writ of habeas corpus was ineffective, as the State authorities did not comply with the ruling ordering the transfer of the alleged victims to a proper center, nor were those measures supervised by the court, as the court that granted the writ had ordered;
e) the anachronistic system in place prevented effective supervision of the court ruling and continual review of the sanctions imposed;
f) the remedies attempted to ascertain the authorities’ blame for the human rights violations at the Center were ineffective; and
g) the investigations into the cause of the fires, the deaths and the injuries that resulted from those fires produced no concrete findings.