and by the Court ordering their receipt, as well as with the subject matter of this case. 51 VI FACTS 55. The facts of this case will be determined by the Court based on the factual framework presented by the Commission, the arguments of the parties, and the evidence provided. In this regard, it should be noted that Argentina explicitly indicated that the facts “referring to the crimes perpetrated by the […] dictatorship […] in the framework of State terrorism and in the context of the coordinated repression of the Condor Plan, are not in dispute,” and that “it cannot and does not wish to discount the very serious facts that caused deep harm to the Julien Grisonas family.” 56. In this regard, it is necessary to highlight the historical significance of the case, since the context in which the facts took place was the result of specific coordination between States within the framework of a doctrine of national security and persecution of those classified as "subversives,” all of which resulted in systematic human rights violations. 52 In this regard, to understand them better, the facts will be set forth as follows: (a) context; (b) relevant regulatory framework; (c) facts committed to the detriment of the Julien Grisonas family, and (d) judicial and administrative proceedings. The facts prior to the date of ratification of this Court’s contentious jurisdiction by Argentina are provided as background. A. Context A.1. The dictatorship in Argentina during the period 1976-1983 57. On March 24, 1976, the commanding generals of the Argentine Armed Forces carried out a coup d’état that overthrew the constitutional government of María Estela Martínez de Perón. A military junta was set up and assumed political power. 53 As of that date, a dictatorship 54 was established that, under the name of "National Reorganization Process," lasted until December 10, 1983. 55 58. In order to pursue this “National Reorganization Process,” the military junta established, inter alia, the following purpose: “Restore the essential values that serve as the foundation for the integral management of the State, [...] eradicate subversion and promote economic development […] in order to ensure the […] establishment of a republican, representative, and federal democracy.” 56 Based on this, the junta “ended by decree the term of office” of the President, dissolved the National Congress, and removed the members of the Supreme Court 16890 to 16990 and 17058 to 17060). 51 The purposes of the testimony are established in the Order of the President of the Court of March 24, 2021, and in the Order of the Court of April 19, 2021. 52 Cf. Case of Goiburú et al. v. Paraguay. Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of September 22, 2006. Series C No. 153. pars. 61(5) and 61(6), and Case of Gelman v. Uruguay, supra, par. 44. 53 Cf. Judgment issued by the National Federal Criminal and Correctional Appeals Chamber of the Federal Capital on December 9, 1985, case No. 13/84 (supra footnote 37). 54 In this Judgment, mentions of the “dictatorship,” the “military government,” or other similar references refer to the political regime established during 1976-1983 in Argentina. 55 On December 10, 1983, the constitutional institutions were reestablished with the inauguration of Raúl Alfonsín as President of the Nation. See El Nunca Más y los crímenes de la dictadura. Ministry of Culture, Presidency of the Argentine Nation, Edición Cultura Argentina, pages. 13, 15, and 30 (supra nota a pie de Page 37). 56 Cf. “Act establishing the purpose and basic objectives of the National Reorganization Process,” issued by the Military Junta on March 24, 1976, document cited in the judgment issued by the National Federal Criminal and Correctional Appeals Chamber of the Federal Capital on December 9, 1985, case No. 13/84. 18