142. The Court concludes that the special administrative procedure was ineffective, in light of what it had to determine (supra paras. 133 to 136), because the Central Bank made an incomplete analysis of the merits of the petitions; this meant that the State violated the material sphere of the right to be heard protected by Article 8(1) of the American Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) thereof, to the detriment of the 539 persons who filed a petition under article 31 of Law 17,613, who are listed in the Annex on victims to this judgment. 143. Regarding the names of these 539 victims, the Court has verified some differences or errors in the names indicated by the Inter-American Commission and those that appear in the respective files and decisions of the Central Bank of Uruguay, as well as some names that are repeated on the list forwarded by the Inter-American Commission.223 To determine and identify the victims in this case, the Court will take 223 According to the evidence provided, the Court has verified the following differences between the identification made of the alleged victims by the Inter-American Commission and the names that appear in the respective Central Bank’s decision: (1) “Ferraro, Soledad”, who the Court understands is “María Soledad Ferraro Core”, as she appears in the Central Bank’s decision; (2) “Bordad, Javier”, who the Court understands is “Ignacio Bordad” because, from his Central Bank file, it is apparent that his complete name is “Ignacio Javier Bordad”; (3) “Griffin, Juan”, who the Court understands is the person who appears in a Central Bank decision as “Juana Griffin”; (4) “Losada Collazo, Juan”, who appears in the Central Bank’s decision as “Juan Losada”; (5) “Frabaile, Carlos”, who the Court understands is the person who appears in a Central Bank decision as “Carlos Frabasile”; (6) “Castaña, Gonzalo”, who the Court understands is the person who appears in a Central Bank decision as “Gonzalo Castagna”; (7) “Delfante, José”, who appears in the Central Bank’s decision as “Eduardo Delfante”, but appeared as “José Delfante” in the table provided by the State on June 15, 2011 (file of petitions under article 31 of Law 17,613 before the Central Bank); (8) “Dura, Rey”, who appears in the Central Bank’s decision as “Daniel Dura”, but appeared as “Rey Dura” in the table provided by the State on June 15, 15 2011 (file of petitions under article 31 of Law 17,613 before the Central Bank); (9) “Guimaraens, Griselda”, who appears in the Central Bank’s decision as “Griselda Marisa Urtiaga Guorisea”, but appears as “Griselda Guimaraens” in the table provided by the State on June 15, 2011 (file of petitions under article 31 of Law 17,613 before the Central Bank); (10) “Santiesteban, Luis Fernando”, who the Court understands is the persons who appears as “Luis Santisteban” in the table provided by the State on June 15, 2011 (file of petitions under article 31 of Law 17,613 before the Central Bank); (11) “Pereira, Cecilia”, who the Court understands is the person who appears in a decision of the Central Bank as “Cecilia Pereiro”; (12) “Pelufo Biselli, Emilio”, who the Court understands is the same person who appears in a decision of the Central Bank as “Peluffo, Emilio”; (13) “Moreira, Marta”, who the Court understands is the same person who appears in a decision of the Central Bank under the name “Martha Moreira”; (14) “Mainardi Rial, María”, who the Court understands is the same person who appears in the Central Bank’s decision as “María Victoria Mainardi”; (15) “Leroy, Yean”, who the Court understands is the same person who appears in a decision of the Central Bank as “Jean Leroy”; (16) “Kouyoomdjian, José”, who the Court understands is the same person who appears in a decision of the Central Bank as “José Kouyoumdjian”; (17) “Haschke, Erika”, who appears in the Central Bank’s decision as “Erika Dagmar Haschke”; (18) “Harcevnicov, Jorge”, who the Court understands is the same person who appears in a decision of the Central Bank as “Jorge Harcenicow”; (19) “Goigochea, Héctor”, who the Court understands is the same person who appears in a decision of the Central Bank as “Héctor Goicochea”; (20) “Gigli Rodríguez, Ma. Iverice”, whose file before the Central Bank reveals that he name is e María Ivelice Gigli Rodríguez”, and who appears in the respective decisions of the Central Bank as “María Gigli”; (21) “Gavioli Piedrahita, José”, who appears in the respective decision of the Central Bank as “José Gavioli”; (22) “Cholaguidis, Elizabeth” who the Court understands is the same person who appears in a decision as “Elizabeth Cholaquidis”; (23) “Barreto Trillo, Vivián”, who the Court understands is the person who appears in a decision of the Central Bank as “Vivian Barretto”; (24) “Balcarcel, Liliana”, who the Court understands is the same person who appears in the Central Bank’s decision as “Liliana Barcarcel”; (25) “Alves Serra, Gloria Renée”, who the Court understands is the same person who appears as “Gloria Alvez” the Central Bank’s decision; (26) “Alsugaray Rodrígues, Carolina”, who the Court understands is the same person who appears in the Central Bank’s decision as “Carolina Alzugaray”; (27) “Abella Demarco, Cristina”, who the Court understands is the same person who appears in a decision of the Central Bank under the name “Maria Cristina Abellá Demarco”; (28) “Saban Cherasi, Nesim”, who the Court understands is the same person who appears in a decision of the Central Bank as “Nesim Selmo Saban”; (29) “Saquieres Garrido, Neli”, who the Court understands is the same person who appears in a decision of the Central Bank as “Nelly Saquieres Garrido”; (30) “Abisab Ache, Chemel”, who the Court understands is the person who appears in a decision of the Central Bank as “Chemel Abisabb Ache”; (31) “Bengochea San Martín, María”, who the Court understands is the same person who appears the Central Bank’s decision as “María Luisa Bengochea.” Also, according to the information and the observations presented by the parties, the Court has verified the following: (1) the alleged victim indicated by the Inter-American Commission as “Antuna Zumarán, María”, corresponds to the person who appears in a decision of the Central Bank as “María Carolina Antuña”; (2) the name of the victim Pierina Ivaldi was repeated on the individualized list presented by the Inter-American Commission, under numbers 79 and 339; (3) the name of the victim María Elvira Quintans was repeated on the individualized list presented by the Inter-American Commission, under numbers 260 and 540; (4) the alleged victim indicated by the InterAmerican Commission as “Coronato, Roque”, in fact includes two different people, “Roque Coronato Buono” 58