Court, the President decided that it was not necessary to convene a public hearing, considering the circumstances of the case and in the absence of a factual dispute. The decision was communicated in an Order of the President of October 20, 2020.8 In that order, the President also required the statements of an ex officio declarant and an expert witness offered by the Commission to be rendered by affidavit. 11. Final arguments and observations. On January 4, 2021, the parties submitted their final written arguments; the representative included several annexes, and the Inter-American Commission presented its final written observations. On January 14, 2021, the State submitted its observations on the documents annexed to the written arguments of the representative. On January 13, 2021, the Commission informed the Court that it had no observations to make. 12. Helpful evidence. On March 5, 2021, the President of the Court asked the State to submit certain documentation as helpful evidence. The State submitted these documents on March 12, 2021. On March 22, 2021, the representative presented his observations to the documentation submitted as helpful evidence. On the same day the Commission indicated that it had no observations. 13. Deliberation of this case. The Court deliberated this judgment in a virtual session held on May 24, 25, and June 3, 2021.9 III JURISDICTION 14. The Court has jurisdiction to hear this case, pursuant to Article 62(3) of the Convention, given that Ecuador has been a State Party to this instrument since December 28, 1977, and accepted the Court’s contentious jurisdiction on July 24, 1984. IV PRELIMINARY OBJECTION 15. The State argued that the Court lacked jurisdiction to hear this case owing to the alleged use of the inter-American human rights system as a fourth instance in relation to the military criminal proceedings. A. Arguments of the parties and of the Commission 16. The State argued that, in the specific case of Mr. Grijalva Bueno, it is evident that his intention was to use first the Inter-American Commission and now the Court as a higher a court with respect to the conviction handed down in a criminal trial by a domestic judicial authority. It held that from the initial petition and throughout the procedure before the Commission, both in the admissibility stage and in the merits Cf. Case of Grijalva Bueno v. Ecuador. Order of the President of the Court of October 20, 2020. Available at: http://www.corteidh.or.cr/docs/asuntos/grijalva_bueno.pdf. 9 Owing to the exceptional circumstances caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, this judgment was deliberated and adopted during the Court’s 142nd Regular Session, which was held virtually using technological resources, as established in the Court’s Rules of Procedure. 8 5