8. Amici curiae. – This Tribunal received three amicus curiae briefs filed by: (a) Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights 6; (b) Legal Clinic on Freedom of Information and Transparency of the University of the Pacific 7, and (c) Ankawa International/Centre for Human Rights 8. 9. Final written arguments and observations . – On March 10, 2022, the parties presented their final written arguments with their respective annexes. On the same date, the Commission presented its final written observations. 10. Observations on the annexes to the final arguments. – On March 22, 2022, the representatives and on March 28, 2022, the State, respectively, submitted their observations on the annexes presented together with the final written arguments from the other party. On March 28, 2022, the Commission indicated that it had no observations on the annexes presented by the parties in this case. 11. Other briefs. – On April 18, 2022, a brief was received from the representative in which it refers to an act of posthumous recognition of Juan Carlos Flores Bedregal by the State based on an agreement with Adela Hortensia Villamil, who is Mr. Flores Bedregal's widow. On May 2, 2022, the Inter-American Commission reported on petition P-1186/09 filed by Ms. Villamil, which was reportedly withdrawn following an agreement between the petitioner and the State. According to the Commission's submissions, such agreement was not approved by the Commission because it was incompatible with the findings of fact and law established in Merits Report No. 60/18. On May 10, 2022, the State submitted its observations on the matter. 12. Expenditures under the Assistance Fund. – On April 1, 2022, the Secretariat, following instructions from the President of the Court, sent information to the State on the expenditures of the Victims' Legal Assistance Fund (hereinafter "the Fund ") in this case. In addition, in accordance with Article 5 of the Court's Rules of Procedure on the Operation of the aforementioned Fund, the Secretariat granted the State a period of time to submit any observations it deemed pertinent. On April 13, 2022, the State submitted its observations. 13. Deliberation of this case. - The Court deliberated this judgment on September and 9, and October 4 and 17, 2022. 5, 6 III JURISDICTION 14. The Court has jurisdiction to hear this case pursuant to Article 62(3) of the Convention, because Bolivia has been a State Party to the American Convention since July 19, 1979, and accepted the contentious jurisdiction of the Court on July 27, 1993. 9 It also deposited the instrument of ratification of the ICPPT on May 5, 1999. 6 The brief was signed by Angelita Baeyens, Program Director, Advocacy and International Litigation, and Deirdre Dlugoleski. The brief analyzes the content and interpretation of the right to access information for victims of serious human rights violations, with special reference to the Case of Flores Bedregal et al. v. Bolivia. 7 The brief was signed by Andrés Calderón, Head of the Academic Department of Law at the University of the Pacific and Director of the Legal Clinic on Information Freedom and Transparency. The brief analyzes the right to access to information in the context of Forced Disappearances, with special reference to the Case of Flores Bedregal et al. v. Bolivia. 8 The brief was signed by Amílcar Romero Beltrán, President of Ankawa Internacional, and Claudio Renato A. Sotelo Torres, Director of the Human Rights Directorate of Ankawa International. The brief analyzes the right to access to information in cases of serious human rights violations. 9 At the moment of depositing the optional clause, on July 27, 1993, Bolivia presented an interpretative declaration regarding its recognition of the Court's jurisdiction, in the following terms "[t]he precepts of unconditionality and indefinite term shall be applied in strict observance of the Political Constitution of the Bolivian 6