57 c) assuming, arguendo, that some names of alleged victims were not in the application, that issue was definitively decided by the Court in its June 21, 2002 order; it would be pointless to revisit this matter yet again; d) on September 16, 2002, before the three-month time period the Court set in that order had expired, the Commission submitted a complete list, with the names of the children who were inmates at the Center between August 1996 and July 2001, which the Permanent Mission of Paraguay to the Organization of American States had submitted by notes dated August 27, 2002 and September 5, 2002. In those notes the State expressly stated that it was complying with operative paragraph 3 of the Court’s June 21, 2002 order. Pleadings of the representatives 104. With regard to the first preliminary objection the State filed, the representatives asked the Court to regard it as out of order on the grounds that: a) when the proceedings on the case got underway and at the time of the early communications sent to the Commission, the fires had not yet occurred and no inmate had died. The State never raised any objection to the assertion that the alleged victims were all inmates at the Center; b) there is no legal defect in the manner in which the application was filed. The Commission provided the names of some alleged victims in its application, and the data necessary to be able to identify the others, thereby satisfying the requirement established in Article 33(1) of the Rules of Court; c) furthermore, subsequent to the State’s prompt cooperation, the Commission delivered to the Court a new list in November 2002, in alphabetical order, making it possible to establish the number of alleged victims and their individual identities; and d) Article 33(1) of the Rules of Court provides that “when this is possible”, the brief containing the application shall include the name and address of the alleged victims, their next of kin or their duly accredited representatives. That article relaxes the formalities required when filing a complaint for inter-American litigation. Considerations of the Court 105. This Court will examine the procedural question raised to determine whether some defect is present in the filing of the application such that the case would only cover the alleged victims named in the application and in the Court’s June 21, 2002 order. 106. In the amendments it has introduced to its Rules of Procedure, the Court has determined that the brief containing the application must indicate the parties to the case (Article 33 of the Rules of Procedure), the parties being understood to include the duly identified alleged victims (Article 2, paragraph 23 of the Rules of Procedure). As the Court has held in specific cases submitted to its jurisdiction, “just