6 IV PARTIAL ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF INTERNATIONAL RESPONSIBILITY 23. In the answer to the application, the State made a partial acknowledgment of international responsibility (supra para. 5). It indicated that “[a]s to the facts, the Plurinational State of Bolivia fully ascribe[d] to that expressed by the Inter-American Commission […].” 24. As to the legal arguments, the Bolivian State indicated that: it acknowledge[d] its international responsibility for the rights contemplated in Articles 1(1), 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, and 25 of the American Convention on Human Rights; [Articles] I, III, IV, [and] XI of the Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearance [of Persons] in relation to Rainer Ibsen Cárdenas and José Luis Ibsen Peña; [and Articles] 5, 8, [and] 25 of the American Convention in connection with Art[icle] 1(1) of that body of law in relation to Martha Castro Mendoza […], Tito Ibsen Castro, Rebeca Ibsen Castro and Raquel Ibsen Castro […], all mentioned by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. 25. During the public hearing held in this case (supra, para. 8), the State’s representative apologized to the next of kin of Rainer Ibsen Cárdenas and José Luis Ibsen Peña in the following terms: with the firm intention of repairing the damage caused, [the State] publicly apologize[s] to all of the Ibsen family, represented […] by […] Tito Ibsen Castro, whom I beg to deliver this emphatic public apology to each one of the members of his family and I beg them to bear in mind that Rainer Ibsen and José Luis Ibsen Peña […] will live forever in the historical memory of the Bolivian nation. The Bolivian people will remember [them] forever […] because of the fight they fought for democracy, giving up their lives […]. 26. The State also indicated in its final arguments that "it acknowledge[d] its international responsibility for the context in which […] the facts that constituted a political and historical environment that defined the years 1971 to 1982 [occurred], the reason for which the Plurinational State of Bolivia went through years of violence and affliction imposed by dictatorial [g]overnments […].” Furthermore, the State indicated that in its domestic jurisdiction, “the Judiciary […] ha[d] issued a Judgment of First Instance through Resolution No. 192/2008 and the Court Order issued on September 28, 2009, by the First Civil Chamber of the Superior Court of the Judicial District of the city of Santa Cruz de la Sierra […].” It noted that “it is aware of the fact that the judgment and the Court Order do not incorporate international human rights standards and do not punish those responsible in accordance with the crimes committed […].” Therefore, it stated that “it [would] take the actions […] necessary so that the Supreme Court of Justice will h[ave] the necessary elements at the time it decides the recourse in cassation.” 27. However, the State contested the arguments of the Commission that “the remains of Rainer Ibsen Cárdenas were found, identified, and delivered by the State to his next of kin nearly 37 years after his disappearance.” It explained that “[i]n 1983, the National Commission for the Investigation of Persons Forcibly Disappeared publicly announced the discovery of a mass grave that contained the remains of Rainer Ibsen Cárdenas[;] as of that moment, [...] the facts committed against him […] were known by the public and by his family,” “who did not take any action until [the year] 2003 […] to claim the remains found.” The State also affirmed that “at no time did it hide [those] remains [but], on the contrary[,] assisted in the identification of the bodies as of 1983[,] the year in which the