5 c) Report on the Merits. – On October 31, 2011, the Commission approved Report on Merits No. 135/11,4 under the terms of article 50 of the Convention (hereinafter “Merits Report”), drawing a set of conclusions and offering several recommendations: a. Conclusions. — The Commission concluded that: i. ii. iii. b. The State was responsible for violating the right to personal liberty and the right to a fair trial (Articles 7 and 8 of the American Convention), read in conjunction with the obligation to respect and ensure the rights set forth in the Convention enshrined in Article 1(1); The State was responsible for violating articles I, XXV and XXVI of the American Declaration concerning events that occurred prior to Argentina's ratification of the American Convention, and The State was not responsible for violating the right to humane treatment, the right to compensation for miscarriage of justice, the right to equal protection before the law, or the right to access to justice (articles 5, 10, 24 and 25 of the Convention). Recommendations. – The Commission therefore recommended that the State proceed to grant the 20 victims full reparations, especially adequate compensation, for the violations declared. d) Notification to the State. – The State was notified of the Report on Merits on December 29, 2011 and given a term of two months to report back on adoption of the recommendations. e) Request for extension and report on compliance – On March 2, 2012, the State of Argentina sent a communiqué requesting more time to report on compliance with the recommendations, but refrained from filing preliminary objections concerning this deadline. On March 29, 2012, the Commission agreed to extend the term by two more months. On April 27, 2012, the State sent a report that in the view of the Commission, demonstrated no progress in complying with the recommendations, merely stating that the case should be brought before domestic judicial authorities, who could decide about damages. f) Submission to the Court. – On May 29, 2012, the Commission submitted to the jurisdiction of the Inter-American Court the facts and human rights violations that the State of Argentina was alleged to have committed and that had continued since the time it came under the contentious jurisdiction of the Court on September 5, 1984, that is, violations of the victims’ right to personal liberty by keeping them in pretrial detention for an excessive period and violating the right to trial with due guarantees within a reasonable period. The Commission appointed Commissioner Rodrigo Escobar and then-Executive Secretary Santiago Canton as its delegates, and Elizabeth Abi-Mershed, Assistant Executive Secretary, María Claudia Pulido and Tatiana Gos, attorneys with the Executive Secretariat, as legal counsel. 3. Requests of the Inter-American Commission. – Based on the foregoing, the Commission asked the Court to hold that the State was internationally responsible for violating the right to personal liberty (article 7 of the Convention) and the right to a fair trial (article 8 of the Convention), read in conjunction with the obligation to respect and guarantee the rights enshrined in the Convention, contained in article 1(1), in injury of the 20 alleged victims of this case. II PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COURT 4. Common interveners - When the alleged victims in the instant case failed to agree on a common representative, the Court authorized designation of more than one intervener, under 4 Cfr. Merits Report No. 135/11. Case 12.167. Hugo Argüelles et al. v. Argentina, October 31, 2011 (file on the merits, folio 6).