a) The right to private property, recognized in Article 21, in relation to Articles 13, 23, and 1(1) of the American Convention, to the detriment of the Kichwa People of Sarayaku and its members; b) The right to life, judicial guarantees and judicial protection, established in Articles 4, 8, and 25, in relation to Article 1(1) of the American Convention, to the detriment of the People and its members; c) The right to freedom of movement and residence recognized in Article 22, in relation to Article 1(1) of the American Convention, to the detriment of the members of the People; d) The right to personal integrity recognized in Article 5 of the American Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) thereof, to the detriment of 20 members of the Kichwa People of Sarayaku;4 and e) The obligation to adopt domestic legal measures established in Article 2 of the American Convention, and Lastly, the Commission asked the Court to order the State to adopt specific measures of reparation 4. The petition was notified to the State and to the representatives5 on July 9, 2010. II PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COURT A. Provisional Measures 5. On June 15, 2004, the Commission submitted to the consideration of the Court a request for provisional measures in favor of the Sarayaku People and its members under Articles 63(2) of the American Convention and 25 of the Court’s Rules of Procedure. The Court ordered provisional measures on July 6, 2004,6 and they remain in effect.7 B. Proceedings 6. On September 10, 2010, Mario Melo Cevallos and CEJIL, representatives of the Sarayaku People in this case (hereinafter “the representatives”), submitted to the Court their brief with pleadings, motions and evidence (hereinafter “pleadings and motions brief”), pursuant to Article 40 of the Court’s Rules of Procedure. The representatives were in substantial agreement with the Commission’s allegations, asked the Court to declare the international responsibility of the State for the alleged violation of the same articles of the American Convention that the Inter-American Commission had indicated, but with a broader scope, and argued that the State had also violated: a) The right to culture, recognized in Article 26 of the Convention in relation to Article 1(1) thereof, to the detriment of the members of the Sarayaku People, and b) The right to personal integrity and the right to personal liberty recognized in Articles 5 and 7 of the Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) of this instrument, as well as Article 6 of the Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture (hereinafter “ICPPT”), to the detriment of the four Sarayaku leaders illegally detained on January 25, 2003, by members of the Army. 4 Namely: Hilda Santi Gualinga, Silvio David Malver Santi, Laureano Gualinga, Edgar Gualinga Machoa, José Luis Gualinga Vargas, Victoria Santi Malaver, Marco Gualinga, Héctor Santi Manya, Marco Santi Vargas, Alonso Isidro Gualinga Machoa, Heriberto Gualinga Santi, Jorge Santi Guerra, Aura Cuji Gualinga, María Angélica Santi Gualinga, Clotilde Gualinga, Emerson Alejandro Shiguango Manya, Romel F. Cisneros Dahua, Jimy Leopoldo Santi Gualinga, Franco Tulio Viteri Gualinga and Cesar Santi. 5 The said petition was first submitted to the Secretariat of the Inter-American Court (hereinafter “the Secretariat”) by facsimile on April 26, 2010, without its attachments. The original petition, its attachments and annexes, together with the respective copies, were received by the Secretariat on May 17, 2010. 6 Cf. Matter of the Sarayaku Indigenous People, Provisional measures with regard to Ecuador. Order of the InterAmerican Court of July 6, 2004. Available at: http://www.Cortetidh.or.cr/docs/medidas/sarayaku_se_01.pdf 7 In Orders of July 17, 2005, and February 4, 2010, the Court ratified the provisional measures in force with regard to Ecuador. Orders available at: http://www.Corteidh.or.cr/docs/medidas/sarayaku_se_02.pdf http://www.Courtidh.or.cr/docs/ medidas/sarayaku_se_04.pdf 5