10 34. On December 30, 2002, the State submitted its reply to Report No. 63/02 relative to the merits of the case issued by the Commission. In said brief the State expressed, in relation to the first of the Commission’s recommendations (supra para. 31), that “it had decided […] to undertake the responsibility of encouraging a legislative reform within the realm of the civil courts in order to make possible, at any given time, the annulment of proceedings within the process when there is proof that a confession has been obtained through torture or when some similar circumstance is proven.” However, the State alleged that “the homicide trial in which [Mr.] Alfonso Martín del Campo was prosecuted […] is res judicata and, in terms of the applicable legislation, it is not possible at this time to invoke any given legal remedy which may permit the revision of the prosecution in its entirety and encourage the pertinent measures to annul the confession obtained presumably under torture.” In turn, the State maintained that, in spite of the above, it was “studying the possibility to establish some legal basis that [would] make it possible to implement a mechanism that [would] follow up the recommendation” of the InterAmerican Commission. Concerning the second recommendation made by the Commission in its report (supra para. 31), the State pointed out that on December 26, 2002 the Deputy Attorney General for Central Preliminary Investigations of the Distrito Federal Attorney General’s Office had adopted a resolution ordering the reopening of Preliminary Investigation SC/3839/95-03, relative to offences allegedly perpetrated by several public servants against Mr. Alfonso Martín-del-Campo. Concerning the reparation recommended by the Commission (supra para. 31), The State expressed that “taking into consideration the current status of the preliminary investigations and the proceedings already legally resolved, the reparation would not be altogether ‘adequate,’ for the lack of certain elements to be taken into consideration, which would probably be included as a result of the preliminary investigation that just started.” 35. On January 21, 2003, the Inter-American Commission decided to submit the case to the Court. IV PROCEEDINGS WITH THE COURT 36. On January 30, 2003, the Inter-American Commission filed the application with the Court. The appendices to the application were received on February 03, 2003. 37. In conformity with Article 22 of the Rules of Procedure, the Commission named Messrs. Juan Méndez and Santiago A. Canton as its Delegates before the Court, and Messrs. Mario López-Garelli y Ariel Dulitzky 1 as its legal advisors. Similarly, and in conformity with Article 33 of the Rules of Procedure, the Commission provided the names and addresses of the alleged victim and of his next of kin, and informed that they would be represented by ACAT and CEJIL. 38. On February 20, 2003, after a preliminary study of the application by the President of the Court (hereinafter the “President”), the Secretariat of the Court (hereinafter the “Secretariat”), transmitted it to the State together with its appendices and informed it about the terms allowed for a response and for the designation of its representation in the proceedings. 1 The Commission made several changes to its representation in the process of the instant case.