2 pursuant to the terms of Article 50 of the Convention which contain certain recommendations that, according to the Commission, were not satisfactorily adopted by the State; for this reason, on July 27, 2007, it decided to bring the case to the jurisdiction of the Court. The Commission appointed Florentín Meléndez (Commissioner), and Mr. Santiago A. Canton (Executive-Secretary) as Delegates and Elizabeth Abi- Mershed (Deputy Executive Secretary) and Debora Benchoam, Manuela Cuvi Rodríguez and Silvia Serrano (all of them, lawyers and specialists of the Executive Secretary) as legal advisors. 2. The application refers to the alleged forced disappearance of Renato Ticona Estrada (hereinafter, “Renato Ticona”, “Mr. Ticona Estrada” or the “victim”) as of July 22, 1980, date on which he and his brother, Hugo Ticona Estrada (hereinafter, "Hugo Ticona" or "Hugo") were detained by an Army patrol in the vicinity of the control gate of Cala-Cala in Oruro, Bolivia; the application also relates to the alleged impunity that surrounded the case for more than 27 years since the occurrence of such event, as well as the long denial of justice experienced by the next-of-kin of Renato Ticona and the alleged lack of reparation of said next-of-kin for the damages caused as a consequence of the lost of a loved one. Moreover, the Commission stated that given the fact that the Court has no jurisdiction ratione temporis to hear the illegal and arbitrary detention and the tortures suffered by Hugo Ticona in the year 1980, it did not include the allegation of these violations in the application. Nevertheless, the Commission did include the alleged denial of justice of which Hugo Ticona was an alleged victim as of the date on which the State acknowledged the competence of the Court to hear such violations. 3. In the application, the Commission requested that this Tribunal adjudge and declare that the State violated the rights of Renato Ticona as enshrined in Articles 3 (Right to Juridical Personality), 4 (Right to Life), 5 (Right to Humane Treatment), 7 (Right to Personal Liberty), 8 (Right to a Fair Trial) and 25 (Right to Judicial Protection) of the American Convention, as well as Articles I, III and XI of the InterAmerican Convention on Forced Disappearance of persons (hereinafter, “IACFDP”). In addition, the Commission requested the Court to declare that Bolivia has violated the rights contained in Articles 5 (Right to Humane Treatment), 8 (Right to a Fair Trial) and 25 (Right to Judicial Protection) of the American Convention, to the detriment of the next-of-kin of Renato Ticona; in particular, his parents, María Honoria Estrada Figueroa de Ticona (hereinafter, "Honoria Estrada de Ticona") and César Ticona Olivares, as well as his brothers Hugo Ticona and Rodo Ticona Estrada (hereinafter, "Rodo Ticona") and his sister, Betzy Ticona Estrada (hereinafter, "Betzy Ticona"). The foregoing in relation to the general obligations to respect and ensure the rights contained in Article 1(1) (Obligation to Respect Rights). Furthermore, the Commission considered that the State failed to comply with the duty to adopt domestic legal provisions according to the provisions of Article 2 (Domestic Legal Effects) of the American Convention, in relation to Articles I and III of the IACFDP. Convention and Articles I, III, IV and XI of the Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearance of Persons. 2 In the Report on the Merits No. 112/06, the Commission concluded that the State violated the rights enshrined in Articles 3 (Right to Juridical Personality), 4 (Right to life), 5 (Right to Humane Treatment), 7 (Right to Personal Liberty), 8 (Right to a fair trial) and 25 (Right to Judicial Protection) of the American Convention, as well as the Articles I, III, IV and XI of the Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearance of Persons, all of them to the detriment of Renato Ticona and Articles 5 (Right to Humane Treatment) and 7 (Right to Personal Liberty) of the Convention to the detriment of Hugo Ticona. Likewise, it concluded that the State violated Articles 5 (Right to Humane Treatment), 8 (Right to a Fair Trial) and 25 (Right to Judicial Protection) of the American Convention, to the detriment of Renato Ticona's next-of-kin. Lastly, the Commission decided that the State failed to comply with a part of Article 2 (Domestic Legal Effects) and 1(1) (Obligation to Respect Rights) of said treaty.