I INTRODUCTION OF THE CASE AND PURPOSE OF THE DISPUTE 1. The case submitted to the Court. On March 16, 2018, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the Inter-American Commission” or “the Commission”) submitted to the jurisdiction of the Court the case of Gorigoitía v. the Argentine Republic (hereinafter “the State of Argentina,” “the state,” or “Argentina”). According to the Commission, the case involves the lack of an ordinary remedy that would allow for comprehensive review of the conviction of Oscar Raúl Gorigoitía for the crime of murder in the framework of a criminal proceeding in the Province of Mendoza, Argentina, in 1997. The Commission argued that Mr. Gorigoitía was not able to appeal to a higher authority for comprehensive review of the judgment, including issues of fact and review of evidence put forward by the defense through the appeal. In this regard, the Commission found that the state had violated, to his detriment, the right to appeal a judgment established in Article 8(2)(h) of the Convention, read in conjunction with the obligations established in articles 1(1) and 2 of the Convention. Likewise, the Commission concluded that as a consequence of the limited nature of the cassation appeal, and the even more limited nature of the extraordinary appeal, Mr. Gorigoitía did not have simple and effective judicial remedies available to him within the framework of the criminal proceeding that culminated in his conviction, in violation also of the right established in Article 25(1) of the Convention, read in conjunction with the obligations set forth in articles 1(1) and 2 of the same instrument. 2. Procedure before the Commission. The procedure before the Commission was as follows: a) Petition. In a communication dated January 19, 1999, the representatives (hereinafter “the petitioners”) filed the initial petition with the Commission. b) Admissibility Report. On July 11, 2013, the Commission approved Admissibility Report No. 35/13.1 c) Report on the Merits. On September 5, 2017, the Commission approved Report on the Merits No. 98/17, in accordance with Article 50 of the Convention (hereinafter also “the Report on the Merits” or “Report No. 98/17”), in which it reached a series of conclusions and made several recommendations to the state.2 d) Notification to the state. On October 18, 2017, the state was notified of Report No. 98/17, giving it a period of two months to report on compliance with the recommendations. e) Follow-up of the recommendations of the Commission. The state did not respond to the Commission's Report on the Merits. f) Submission to the Court. On March 16, 2018, the Commission submitted all the facts and human rights violations described in the Merits Report to the jurisdiction of the Inter- It was notified to the parties on September 6, 2013. Conclusions. The Commission concluded that the state was responsible for the violation of the rights to appeal a ruling and to judicial protection established in articles 8(2)(h) and 25(1) of the American Convention, read in conjunction with the obligations established in articles 1(1) and 2 of the same instrument, to the detriment of Oscar Raúl Gorigoitía. Recommendations. Consequently, the Commission made a series of recommendations to the state: (i) order the necessary measures so that, should he wish to, Mr. Gorigoitía could file an appeal for a comprehensive review of the conviction; (ii) provide full reparations for the violations declared in the report, including pecuniary and nonpecuniary damages; and (iii) order the legislative measures necessary to adapt the domestic legislation on cassation appeals to the standards established in the Report on the right enshrined in Article 8(2)(h) of the American Convention. Likewise, and independent of amendments to legal provisions, ensure the judicial authorities conduct review of compliance with human rights conventions when resolving appeals of convictions in a manner consistent with the standards established in the Report on the Merits. 1 2 3