9 concurrence with that acknowledgment, expressed at the previous hearing. The Court then invited the representative of the victim’s next of kin to present their observations. 39. The delegate of the Inter-American Commission clarified that he would also serve as the representative of the victim’s next of kin who were present for the hearing, by virtue of a special power of attorney given for that purpose before the Secretary of the Court. That power of attorney was as follows: In the presence of […] Manuel E. Ventura-Robles, Secretary of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Nelly Guadalupe Benavides-Cevallos, passport no. SD eighty-two, zero five two, and Alfonso Benavides Cevallos, passport no. SI twenty-five, six hundred and fifty eight, hereby declare that: 1) They are brother and sister to Ms. Consuelo Benavides Cevallos, as shown in affidavits submitted in the proceedings being conducted at the Inter-American Court of Human Rights between the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and the State of Ecuador in connection with the events whose victim was Ms. Consuelo Benavides Cevallos. 2) That in that capacity they grant a special power of attorney to Mr. Robert K. Goldman, delegate of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in the instant case, so that he might serve as their legal representative, with full powers, during the acquiescence and friendly settlement phase being conducted before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, pursuant to Articles 52.2 and 53 of its Rules of Procedure. Statement: They further declare that they recognize their parents, Luis Darío Benavides Enríquez and Sofía Rosa María Cevallos, as the sole beneficiaries of any pecuniary damages agreed to before this Court. Speaking as the representative of the victim’s next of kin, he stated that the State had unequivocally admitted all the violations that were alleged in the application and that, as a consequence, there was no disagreement on the merits of the case. 40. Also, as delegate of the Commission, he stated that the Commission concurred with the agreement concluded between the State and the next of kin of Ms. Benavides Cevallos. 41. The text of the agreement introduced by the State makes it clear and unequivocal that it is willing to acquiesce in the claims in the Commission’s application. 42. Having heard the opinion of the Commission and of the victim’s next of kin (Article 52.2 of the Rules of Procedure) (supra, paragraphs 36 and 39), the Court finds that there is no controversy between the State and the Commission as to the material facts of the instant case (Cf: Garrido and Baigorria Case, Judgment of February 2, 1996. Series C No. 26, para. 27.) Consequently, the Court takes as proven the facts recounted in paragraphs 35 and 36 of this judgment. 43. The Court notes that the documents presented by the State and its statements made during the public hearings make express reference to those provisions of the American Convention that the State acknowledges it violated. From this information and from the facts now established, the Court finds that the State, as it has expressly acknowledged, has incurred international responsibility for