7 33. At the first hearing, the President informed the State and the Commission that the Court had taken cognizance of the February 20, 1998 agreement mentioned above (supra, paragraphs 25, 27 and 29) wherein the State acknowledged its international responsibility in the instant case. He also advised that the Court would examine the following points: first, the observations from the State on its acknowledgment of responsibility; second, the opinion of the Commission on the subject; third, the opinion of the victim’s next of kin or their representative in that regard; and fourth, the friendly settlement proposed by the State. The first two points would be discussed at the first hearing, and the second two at the second hearing. V ACQUIESCENCE 34. Article 52.2 of the Rules of Procedure stipulates that: [i]f the respondent informs the Court of its acquiescence in the claims of the party that has brought the case, the Court shall decide, after hearing the opinions of the latter and the representatives of the victims or their next of kin, whether such acquiescence and its juridical effects are acceptable. In that event, the Court shall determine the appropriate reparations and indemnities. 35. During the first public hearing the Court held on June 11, 1998, the agent for Ecuador said the following: I wish to state for the record that my country accepts and acknowledges its responsibility in the disappearance and death of Professor Consuelo Benavides Cevallos […and that] the name of Professor Benavides has also been cleared in all the spoken and written media in [Ecuador], as the struggle that her family has waged for so many years to bring the truth to light has been publicized at all levels. The agreement already reached with the Benavides family is fundamental and incontrovertible evidence of the Ecuadorian State’s good faith and of its desire to make reparations for all the damages and injury caused to the Benavides Cevallos family. The Ambassador of Ecuador added that: [t]he finding of the proceedings conducted in the Supreme Court of Justice of Ecuador was that on December 4, 1985, Ms. Consuelo Benavides was unlawfully and arbitrarily detained by members of the Ecuadorian Marine Corps in Quininde, Esmeraldas Province, for purposes of investigation into alleged subversive activities associated with the "ALFARO VIVE CARAJO" guerilla group. On December 13, 1985, her body was found in Rocafuerte parish, Esmeraldas county. Given these facts, the respective criminal proceedings were instituted with the various judicial bodies, and the finding was that Consuelo Benavides was unlawfully and arbitrarily detained, tortured and murdered by agents of the Ecuadorian State. […] The acts perpetrated by agents of the Ecuadorian State Marine Corps violated the Constitution and [its] domestic laws, and the American Convention on Human Rights to which [said] country is party. [...] Articles 1, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8 and 25 of the American Convention on Human Rights were violated. […] The proceedings in the domestic courts were riddled with unwarranted delays, technicalities, inefficiency, and denial of justice. The Ecuadorian State was unable to