3 a. That after Attorney Gangaram Panday, the victim's brother, had reported what had happened, the Attorney General "ordered an autopsy, and the Judge-Advocate, together with Attorney Gangaram Panday, were able to visit the morgue and witness the autopsy." b. That, according to the Government's note of May 2, 1989, "an autopsy report was drawn up, in which the anatomical pathologist came to the conclusion that it was a case of suicide. That conclusion was transmitted to the deceased's brother, Attorney Gangaram Panday." The note also stated that a copy of the autopsy report had not been requested and that the Department of Technical and Criminal Investigations and the Department of Identifications prepared a report exploring the possibility that ASOK GANGARAM PANDAY might have hanged himself with his belt, a fact confirmed by the officer in charge of the investigation. (Capital letters in the original) Finally, the note indicated that the Attorney General considered it important to look into the possibility that the Military Police officer who arrested ASOK Gangaram Panday might be guilty of unlawful deprivation of liberty or illegal detention and [that he] had ordered the Judge-Advocate to summon the Military Police officer to appear before the Military Court. (Capital letters in the original) 6. According to the application filed by the Commission with the Court, the petitioner's representative before the Commission, Professor Claudio Grossman, requested a hearing with the Commission on September 14, 1989. The hearing was held that same month, during the Commission's 76th Regular Session. In the course of the hearing, Professor Grossman reiterated the nature of the petition and requested a friendly settlement. Although Professor Grossman met with the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Suriname in November, 1989, in the presence of Dr. David Padilla, no friendly settlement could be reached in this case. 7. In a letter dated January 29, 1990, which is transcribed in the Commission's Report Nº 04/90 of May 15, 1990, attached to the petition, the petitioner reported that certain members of the Military Police of his acquaintance had asserted that Asok was tortured in Fort Zeeland, not at Zanderij, [but] they are afraid to testify, and he also knows certain people in the morgue who contend that Asok died before the date stated in the official report [. . .] [that he has] sent a copy of the findings of the third autopsy, signed by the Pathologist [and that there are no] copies of the other two, although the press referred to them. 8. In a communication dated February 4, 1990 which accompanies the petition, anatomical pathologist Dr. Richard Baltaro, Ph.D., M.D., gave Professor Grossman his professional evaluation of the videotape that the latter had sent him, and which had been filmed while the body of Asok Gangaram Panday was being washed. Although he found the quality of the videotape to be unsatisfactory, Dr. Baltaro was of the opinion that [t]he type of death is not natural. The cause of death was asphyxia resulting from hanging. Based on the evidence presented to me, I am inclined to conclude that the person died by hanging. As to the manner of death, however, it cannot be established whether it was accidental, a suicide, or homicide. Given the evidence provided to me, if I had to sign the death certificate, I would ascribe the death to 'unknown causes' but would prefer to investigate the case further. Professor Grossman transmitted Dr. Baltaro's report to the Commission on March 21, 1990. He also enclosed a copy of the death certificate signed by Dr. M. A. Vrede, anatomical pathologist of the Anatomical Hospital of Paramaribo, certifying that Asok Gangaram Panday died "a violent death."