2 1. This case was submitted to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (hereinafter “the Court” or “the Inter-American Court”) by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the Commission” or the “Inter-American Commission”) by petition of August 3, 1995. The case originated in a complaint (No. 11.219) against Guatemala lodged with the Secretariat of the Commission on November 18, 1993. 2. In referring the case to the Court, the Commission invoked Articles 50 and 51 of the American Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter “the Convention” or “the American Convention”) and Articles 26 et seq. of the Rules of Procedure. The Commission submitted this case to the Court for a decision as to whether there had been a violation of the following Articles of the Convention: 7 (Right to Personal Liberty), 4 (Right to Life), 25 (Right to Judicial Protection), 8 (Right to a Fair Trial), 13 (Freedom of Thought and Expression), and 22 (Freedom of Movement and Residence), all these in relation to Article 1(1) of the Convention, with the alleged “violation of the rights to personal liberty, life and freedom of expression as well as for the denial of justice to the detriment of Mr. Nicholas Chapman Blake,” and of Article 51(2) of the Convention for refusal to “implement the recommendations made by the Commission.” In addition, the Commission asked the Court to declare that the Government must make full reparation to Nicholas Chapman Blake's next of kin for the grave material -and moral- damage suffered as a result of the multiple violations of rights protected by the Convention and the enormous expenses incurred by the victim's relatives to establish his whereabouts and identify those responsible for his disappearance and subsequent concealment. Lastly, it asked the Court to order the Government to pay the costs “of this case, including the fees of the professionals who served as the victim's representatives before the State authorities and in the processing of the case before the Commission and the Honorable Court.” 3. The Inter-American Commission designated Claudio Grossman and John Donaldson to act as its Delegates, and Edith Márquez-Rodríguez, David J. Padilla and Domingo E. Acevedo to act as its Attorneys. It also named the following persons to act as Assistants authorized to represent the victim: Janelle M. Diller, Margarita Gutiérrez, Joanne M. Hoeper, Felipe González, Diego Rodríguez, Arturo González and A. James Vázquez-Azpiri. 4. By note of August 18, 1995, after a preliminary review of the application by the President of the Court (hereinafter “the President”), the Secretariat of the Court (hereinafter “the Secretariat”) notified the Government of the application and informed it that it had a period of three months in which to answer, two weeks to name an Agent and Alternate Agent, and thirty days to file preliminary objections, all those periods to commence on the date of notification of the application. By communication of the same date the Government was also invited to appoint a Judge ad hoc. 5. On September 1, 1995, the Government gave notice that it had designated Mr. Dennis Alonzo-Mazariegos as Agent and Mr. Vicente Arranz-Sanz as Alternate Agent. On September 22, 1995, the Government informed the Secretariat that it had appointed Mr. Alfonso Novales-Aguirre as Judge ad hoc. 6. On September 16, 1995, in accordance with Article 31 of the Rules of Procedure, the Government submitted a brief containing its preliminary objections (see infra para. 22).

Select target paragraph3