3 3. On March 7, 1997, the Commission received at its Secretariat a complaint made by Mrs. Carmen Judith Cardó Guarderas on behalf of her husband, Mr. Cesti Hurtado. On the tenth of the same month and year, the Commission communicated the complaint to the State, of which it requested the submission of the appropriate information within a period of 90 days. 4. On April 25, 1997, the Commission requested that Peru, as a precautionary measure, inform it as to whether it had complied “with all aspects of the decision in habeas corpus proceeding” rendered in favor of Mr. Cesti Hurtado and, if applicable, of what measures it had adopted in that respect. It also requested that the State submit information as to the medical attention that Mr. Cesti Hurtado would receive. On May 19 of that year, the State submitted its answer to the Commission, which was sent in relevant part to the petitioner on May 28 of that year. 5. On July 9, 1997, the State submitted “collective information” about this case, which, in the viewpoint of the Commission, contained “a synthesis of the positions that it had taken in earlier communications.” 6. On September 12, 1997, the Commission placed itself at the disposal of the parties to reach a friendly settlement and requested that they give an answer to this offer within a period of fifteen days. The State did not respond to this offer. 7. On October 16, 1997, during its 97th Regular Session, the Commission approved Report No. 45/97, which was sent to the State on October 30, 1997. In that Report, the Commission made the following conclusions: 1. The Peruvian State is responsible for the violation of the right to personal liberty of Mr. Gustavo Adolfo Cesti Hurtado, who is detained in the military prison of the Simón Bolívar Barracks of Lima, a right which is protected by Article 7(1) of the American Convention. 2. The Peruvian State is responsible for the violation of the right to due process to the detriment of Mr. Gustavo Adolfo Cesti Hurtado, by having subjected him to a tribunal that lacked jurisdiction to make a decision as to his rights, and for the deprivation of his personal liberty, rights that are set forth is Articles 8(1) and 7(6) respectively of the Convention. 3. The Peruvian State is responsible for the violation of the right to the honor and the good reputation of Mr. Gustavo Adolfo Cesti Hurtado, a right that is set forth in Article 11 of the Convention, on having found him guilty of the commission of a crime, as a result of an illegal proceeding. 4. The Peruvian State is responsible for the failure to comply with the decision on habeas corpus that was rendered in favor of Mr. Gustavo Adolfo Cesti Hurtado in a final and unappealable decision by the Special Public Law Chamber of the Superior Court of Lima, violating in that way the right of the aforementioned Mr. Cesti to the execution of decisions rendered in his favor as a consequence of the simple and prompt recourse to which he has a right under Articles 25(1) and 25(a) and 25(2)(c) of the American Convention on Human Rights. 5. The Peruvian State is responsible for the violation of the right set forth in Article 21 of the Convention, to the detriment of Mr. Cesti Hurtado. 6. The Peruvian State has not permitted Mr. Gustavo Adolfo Cesti Hurtado to receive proper medical attention, which is incompatible with Article 5 of the Convention. and the following recommendations to the State: