I INTRODUCTION OF THE CASE AND PURPOSE OF THE DISPUTE 1. The case submitted to the Court. On March 7, 2012, under the provisions of Articles 51 and 61 of the American Convention, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the Inter-American Commission” or “the Commission”) submitted the case of “Allan R[andolph] Brewer Carías” 2 against the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela (hereinafter “the State” or “Venezuela”) to the jurisdiction of the Inter-American Court (hereinafter “submission brief”). The case relates to “the [presumed] lack of judicial guarantees and judicial protection in the proceedings brought against the constitutional lawyer, Allan R. Brewer Carías for the crime of conspiracy to change the Constitution by violent means, in the context of the events of April 11 to 13, 2002; in particular his supposed participation in the drafting of the so-called ‘Carmona Decree’ ordering the dissolution of the public authorities and the establishment of a ‘government of democratic transition.’” The Commission concluded that “the fact that three temporary judges were responsible for hearing the preliminary stage of the criminal proceedings in itself constituted a violation of judicial guarantees.” The Commission also considered that, in this case, “the fact that one of the temporary judges was suspended and replaced two days after having filed a complaint for failure to comply with an order he had issued requiring that the accused be given access to the complete file on his case, together with the rules and practices in Venezuela regarding the appointment, dismissal, and provisional status of judges, constituted violations of the guarantees of judicial independence and impartiality and contravened the right to judicial protection.” Lastly, the Commission considered that “not being able to make photocopies of the file and to access it in its entirety violated the [presumed] victim’s right to have adequate means for preparing his defense.” 2. Proceedings before the Commission. The proceedings before the Commission were as follows: a) Petition. On January 24, 2007, Pedro Nikken, Helio Bicudo, Claudio Grossman, Juan E. Méndez, Douglass Cassel and Héctor Faúndez Ledesma (hereinafter “the representatives”) submitted the initial petition. b) Admissibility Report. On September 8, 2009, the Commission approved Admissibility Report No. 97/09, 3 in which it concluded that “the […] case met the requirements for admissibility set out in Articles 46 and 47 of the American Convention as regards claims related to Articles 1, 2, 8, 13 and 25, while that the claims under Articles 7, 11, 22 and 24 are inadmissible.” c) Merits Report. On November 3, 2011, the Commission approved Merits Report No. 171/11, 4 pursuant to Article 50 of the Convention (hereinafter also “the Merits Report” or “Report No. 171/11”), in which it reached a series of conclusions and made several recommendations to the State: 2 Allan Brewer Carías is an expert in constitutional law. He has been an alternate Senator, Minister, and member of the 1999 National Constituent Assembly. Curriculum Vitae of Allan R. Brewer Carías (file of annexes to the report of the Commission, appendix, tome V, folios 1770 to 1922). 3 Cf. Admissibility Report No. 97/09, Petition 84-07, Allan R. Brewer Carías, Venezuela, September 8, 2009 (file of annexes to the report, appendix, tome IV, folios 3607 to 3632). 4 Cf. Merits Report No. 171/11, Case of 12.724, Allan R. Brewer Carías, Venezuela, November 3, 2011 (Merits Report, tome I, folios 6 to 46). 3