or collectively "For purposes of the present document, 'victims' are persons who individually ic loss or suffered harm, including physical or mental injury, emotional suffering , econom te gross substantial impairment of their fundamental rights, through acts or omissions that constrtu arian law. violations of international human rights law, or serious violations of international humanit includes the Where appropriate, and In accordance with domestic law, the term 'victim' also harm in Immediate family or dependants of the direct victim and persons who have suffered 15 intervening to assist victims in distress or to prevent victimization". 48. Regarding the content of the notion of closest relatives of the direct victim, Interinternational jurisprudence is not rigorously uniform . Whereas, for instance, the s as American Court of Human Rights has In some cases considered closest relative 6 s and fathers, mothers, children and spouses1 , it has in most cases also included brother sisters of the direct victim.17 19 Other Mauritian In the same vein: Committee on Human Rights. Shirin Aumeeruddy-Cziffra and 9 2 "A person can only Women v Mauritius , Decision of 9 April 1981 , Communtcation 035/197 8, para. actually affected It is a ts she or he if claim to be a victim in the sense of article 1 of the Optional Protocol Aslakhanova v. Russia, matter of degree how concretely this requtrement should be taken"; ECHR: of the disappeared Judgment of 18 December 2012, para. 133. • ... the applicants, who are close relatives of the distress and account on ion, men, must be considered victims of a VIolation of Article 3 of the Convent ascertain the fate of their anguish which they suffered, and continue to suffer. as a result of their inability to family members and of the manner In which their complaints have been dealt with." 16 Judgment of 18 See for example · IACHR. Bulacio v Argentma (Ments, Reparation and Costs), ns, Ments, ObJectio ary September 2003, para 85; IACHR Chitay Nech and Others v. Guatemala , (Prelimin has found that It can Reparations and Costs), Judgement of 25 May 2010, para 220: " .. this Tribunal kin of v1cttms of certain declare a violation of the right to phystcal and moral Integrity of the direct next of /uris tantum tion violations of human rights such as forced disappearance, by applying a presump 16 permanent domestic regarding mothers and fathers, sons and daughters, husbands and wives, and circumstances of the r particula the to nds correspo this partners (hereinafter, 'direct next of ktn'), so long as said presumptiOn". the rebut to State case. Regarding the said direct next of kin, tt corresponds to the ns, Merits, Reparations IACHR Gonzalez Medina and Others v Dominican Republic , (Preliminary Objectio and Costs), Judgment of 27 February 2012, para. 270 t of 27 Novembe r See for example : IACHR: Loayza Tomayo v. Peru, (Reparations and Costs) Judgmen Judgement of 25 1998, para 92; IACHR: Myrna Mack v Guatemala, (Merits, Reparations and Costs), s. Merits, Objection ary (Prelimin November 2003, para. 243; IACHR: ltuango Massacres v. Colombia , case law ... the Court Reparaltons and Costs), Judgment of 1 July 2006, para 264. "In keeping with tts ants and ascendants considers that the adequately-tdentified immedtate next of kin are the direct descend or permanent spouse and siblings, also and of the alleged victim, namely· mother. father, children, 17 16