American Convention, in relation to Articles I and II of the Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearance of Persons. Inasmuch as this violation was not alleged by the Commission and regarding which the State did not recognize international responsibility, the Court will rule on the matter in the chapter on the merits of this Judgment. V PRELIMINARY QUESTION: DETERMINATION OF THE VICTIMS 28. The Commission identified the following persons as alleged victims in this case: Cesar Gustavo Garzón Guzmán; his father, Julio Garzón; his mother, Clorinda Guzmán de Garzón; his brothers, Luis Alberto Garzón Guzmán and Rodrigo Garzón Guzmán and his brother-inlaw, Luis Lascano. The Commission also stated that, during the proceedings in the case, the representative mentioned a sister and a niece of Mr. Garzón Guzmán, whose names are not in the file.12 29. The representative, for its part, identified, as presumed victims, in addition to Mr. Garzón Guzmán, (i) María Clorinda Guzmán, (ii) Ana Julia Lascano, (iii) Luis Alberto Garzón Guzmán, (iv) Carlos Eduardo Garzón Guzmán, (v) Byron Gonzalo Garzón Guzmán, and (vi) Iván Rodrigo Garzón Guzmán. It also indicated that Julio Garzón, father of César Gustavo, had died and that Luis Lascano “was the brother-in-law of the victim, who at the beginning aided the family in the search for César Gustavo Garzón Guzmán.” As to Ana Julia Lascano Garzón, it indicated that she is the niece of Mr. Garzón Guzmán and “for years, together with the victim’s mother, went every Wednesday to the Plaza Grande to demand that the Government investigate the event.” Finally, with respect to Byron Gonzalo Garzón and Carlos Eduardo Garzón Guzmán, the representative pointed out that they are brothers of César Gustavo and that, together with the other siblings and the mother have demanded that the State investigate the event and identify those responsible in order that they be appropriately punished. 30. In its answering brief, the State maintained that, pursuant to Article 35(1) of the Rules of the Court, the alleged victims must be identified during the procedure before the Commission and that it is not possible to add beneficiaries after the submission of the Merits Report, except in the event of the exceptional circumstances indicated in Article 35(2) of the Rules, which, according to the State, do not exist in the present case. Later, during the public hearing held on January 28, 2021, in referring to the recognition of international responsibility, it stated that its acceptance was limited to the contents of the Merits Report with respect to the determination of the victims. 31. The Court reiterates that, pursuant to Article 35(1) of the Rules and the Court’s consistent case law, the alleged victims must be identified in the Merits Report referred to in Article 50 of the Convention.13 On some occasions, in accordance with Article 35(2) of the Rules, in view of the special circumstances of the case and the magnitude of the violation, the Court has admitted persons not included in that document as victims, provided that it was not possible to identify them because of massive or collective violations.14 The Court, finds The Merits Report 22/17 states: “According to the file of the case, the next of kin of César Gustavo Garzón Guzmán are: i) his father Julio Garzón; his mother Clorinda Guzmán de Garzón; ii) his brothers Luis Alberto Garzón Guzmán and Rodrigo Garzón Guzmán and iii) his brother-in-law Luis Lascano. In some briefs of the petitioners, there is a mention of a sister and a niece of Mr. Garzón Guzmán, whose names are not included in the file. 12 Cf. Case of the Barrios Family v. Venezuela. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of November 24, 2011. Series C No. 237, footnote 214 and Case of Guachalá Chimbo et al. v. Ecuador. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of March 26, 2021. Series C No. 423, para. 23. 13 14 Cf. Case of the Río Negro Massacres v. Guatemala. Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations and Costs. 8