3 Finally, the Commission asked the Court to order the State to adopt various measures of pecuniary and non-pecuniary reparation. 5. On May 9, 2007, the GIDH, represented by María Victoria Fallon Morales, Patricia Fuenmayor Gómez, and John Arturo Cárdenas Mesa, and the Comisión Colombiana de Juristas [Colombian Commission of Jurists] (hereinafter “CCJ”), represented by Gustavo Gallón Giraldo and Luz Marina Monzón Cifuentes, as representatives of the alleged victims and their next of kin (hereinafter “the representatives”), presented their brief with pleadings, motions, and evidence (hereinafter “brief with pleadings and motions” or “the representatives’ brief”), in the terms of Article 23 of the Rules of Procedure. The representatives asked the Court to declare that the State had violated the same rights as those alleged by the Commission and, in addition, they alleged that the State was responsible for the violation of: (a) Article 5(1) (Right to Humane Treatment) of the Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) (Obligation to Respect Rights) thereof, to the detriment of “the next of kin of Jesús María Valle Jaramillo and Nelly Valle Jaramillo”; (b) Article 13 (Freedom of Thought and Expression) of the Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) (Obligation to Respect Rights) thereof, to the detriment of Jesús María Valle Jaramillo; (c) Article 22 (1) (Freedom of Movement and Residence) of the Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) (Obligation to Respect Rights) thereof, to the detriment of the following next of kin of Carlos Fernando Jaramillo Correa: Gloria Lucía Correa García, Carlos Enrique Jaramillo Correa, Carolina Jaramillo Correa, and María Lucía Jaramillo Correa; (d) Articles 8(1) (Right to a Fair Trial) and 25 (Right to Judicial Protection) of the Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) (Obligation to Respect Rights) thereof, to the detriment of “all the [alleged] victims and their next of kin”; (e) Article 11(1) and (2) (Right to Privacy) of the Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) (Obligation to Respect Rights) thereof, to the detriment of Jesús María Valle Jaramillo, Carlos Fernando Jaramillo Correa, “and their/his next of kin”; (f) Articles 5(1) (Right to Humane Treatment), 13 (Freedom of Thought and Expression), and 16 (Freedom of Association) of the Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) (Obligation to Respect Rights) thereof, to the detriment of “the indirect victims, [namely,] the human rights defenders”; and (g) Article 17 (Rights of the Family) of the Convention, to the detriment of “the next of kin of the victims.” Additionally, the representatives requested the adoption of certain measures of reparation and the reimbursement of the expenses incurred during the proceedings before the Court. 6. On July 9, 2007, the State, represented by Jorge Aníbal Gómez Gallego, Agent, and Pedro E. Díaz Romero, Deputy Agent, presented its brief in answer to the application and with observations on the representatives’ brief (hereinafter “answer to the application”), in which it “partially acknowledged its international responsibility” for the violation of specific articles of the Convention as alleged by the Commission and the representatives, denied its