requirements of Article 13 of the American Convention. As a consequence, it requested the Court to find and declare the international responsibility of the State for the violation of the right to freedom of thought and expression of Mr. Jorge Fontevecchia and Mr. Héctor D’Amico, enshrined in Article 13 of the American Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) thereof. The Commission requested that the Court order various measures of reparation. 3. Legal notice of the submission of the case by the Commission was provided to the representatives on January 25, 2010. On March 28, 2010, the Centro de Estudios Legales y Sociales [Center for Legal and Social Studies] and Eduardo Bertoni (hereinafter “the representatives”) submitted their brief of pleadings, motions, and evidence (hereinafter “brief of pleadings and motions”), pursuant to Articles 25 and 40 of the Rules of Procedure. The representatives coincided, in general, with the alleged violation by the Inter-American Commission in relation to Article 13 of the American Convention and added the alleged noncompliance with the obligation to adopt domestic legal effects, established in Article 2 thereof, to the detriment of the alleged victims. Lastly, they requested the Court to order the State to adopt several measures of reparation. 4. On June 10, 2011, the State presented a brief in response to the presentation of the case and observations to the brief of pleadings and motions (hereinafter “answer to the application or answer” or “answer”). Argentina mentioned several institutional and normative changes, as well as jurisprudential adaptation “to the international standards on freedom of expression that have modified the situation that existed at the time of the ruling of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation against the alleged victims.” As a consequence, the “Argentine legal system, at the moment, is in consonance with the American Convention and the international standards on freedom of expression. Lastly, the State appointed as Agents Eduardo Acevedo Díaz, Juan José Arcuri, Alberto Javier Salgado, Natalia Luterstein. II PROCEEDING BEFORE THE COURT 5. After the presentation of the principal briefs (supra paras. 1 to 4), as well as the other briefs submitted by the parties, the President ordered, by way of the Order of July 27, 2011, the expert opinion proposed by the representatives by way of a statement before a notary public (hereinafter also “affidavit”) where the State had the opportunity to ask questions and make observations. Moreover, by way of an Order, the President summoned the Inter-American Commission, the representatives, and the States to a public hearing to receive the statements of two alleged victims proposed by the representatives, the report of an expert summoned ex oficio, and the final oral arguments of the representatives and the State, as well as the final oral observations of the Commission regarding the merits, reparations, and costs. 5 6. The public hearing was held on August 24 and 25, 2011, during the 92 Regular Period of Sessions of the Court, in Bogota, Republic of Colombia. 6 At the hearing, the 5 Cf. Case of Fontevecchia and D’ Amico V. Argentina. Summons to the Public Hearing. Order of the President of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights on July 27, 2011. 6 At this hearing appeared: a) for the Inter-American Commission: Catalina Botero, Michael Camillieri and Karla Quintana Osuna, Advisor; b) for the representatives, Eduardo Bertoni, Maria Lourdes Bascary Gabriela Kretzel, and, c) for the State:Gustavo Roque Stefanelli, Council of the Argentine Embassy in Colombia, Mariano Zaragoza Ferrer, Minister of the Argentine Embassy in Colombia, and Marina Abasto, official of the Argentine Embassy in Colombia. 4