their pleadings and motions brief who were not included on the Inter-American Commission’s list. Therefore, in application of the Court’s constant jurisprudence as well as Article 34(1) of the Court’s previous Rules of the Procedure, the said 56 people will not be considered alleged victims in this case. 50. Based on the foregoing, the Court has established that 718 persons will be considered as alleged victims in this case, who were indicated as such by the InterAmerican Commission in the application and who coincide with those indicated in the Report referred to in Article 50 of the American Convention. 51. The Court has noted that, with regard to 22 alleged victims included in the application, the Commission indicated their names incorrectly. This has led to situations such as the State understanding that the representatives had added certain individuals as alleged victims when, in fact, they are the same people indicated by the Commission with their names appearing incorrectly.28 The Court will take into account the evidence (26) Lorenzo Otero, Álvaro Ricardo; (27) Marinelli, Indolfo Hector; (28) Mauri, Jessica Alba; (29) Mere, Juan José; (30) Neves Aldaya, Miriam Nelly; (31) Notero, Álvaro; (32) Ois Castro, Martin Olimar; (33) Olivier, Mariela Marisa; (34) Padilla, Washington Omar; (35) Pereira Martínez, Eduardo; (36) Pereyra de Pugliese, Elsa Raquel; (37) Pérez Habiaga, Ricardo Gabriel; (38) Piazza Forno, Susana; (39) Pumar Bravo, Fabián; (40) Raiberti, Mónica Marta; (41) Ramis, Norberto Francisco; (42) Rivas Ferraro, Gonzalo; (43) Rivoir Bein, Zulma Mary; (44) Rodríguez Suarez, Miguel Ángel; (45) Rovira Legnazzi, Zapican; (46) Schmithals Scharnweber, Erika; (47) Schmithals Scharnweber, Irene; (48) Señorano Siemens, José María; (49) Grudzien, Elizabeth; (50) Siccardi, Osiris; (51) Skliro, María; (52) Taño Feijoo, Javier; (53) Triver, Fabián; (54) Ventos, Pedro; (55) Vera, Adriana, and (56) Zas, Ramón Leonel. In addition, the Court verified that, of the 66 individuals who Uruguay indicated were not included by the Inter-American Commission, 12 of them were named by the latter as alleged victims in its application and subsequently individualized in the list added by the Inter-American Commission together with its final written observations. These alleged victims are as follows: (1) Fortunata Carreño, (2) Anna Ganger, (3) José Enrique González Amaro, (4) María Lerma Tejería, (5) Stella Mazzoni, (6) Carlos Mezquita, (7) Micaela Modesta Núñez, (8) Jorge Humberto Sena, (9) Teresa Caligaris, (10) Pedro Federico Ventós Coll, (11) Esmeralda Verlini and (12) María Teresa Verlini. Also, regarding the alleged victim, Carlos Mezquita, the Court has verified that the way in which he was indicated by the Inter-American Commission, as “Mezquita, Revello,” in fact included two people: “Carlos Mezquita” and “Mónica Revello,” according to Central Bank file No. 2003/0470 provided by the State. The Court considers that both these persons were indicated as alleged victims by the Inter-American Commission. Cf. Carlos Mezquita and Mónica Revello (File No. 2003/0470) (file of attachments to the State’s final written arguments, volume I, attachment 3, folios 30101 to 30104). 28 The Court has verified that the following alleged victims indicated by the Inter-American Commission and the representatives, with some differences in the names, are the same person: (1) “Acuña, Amalia” and “Antuña, Amalia”, who the representatives and the Inter-American Commission have confirmed are the same person and who appears in the Central Bank’s decision as “Amalia Antuña”; (2) “Amo, D’Alessandro José” and “Amo, José Luis”, who appears in the Central Bank file as “José Luis Amo D’Alessandro” and in the respective decisions as “José Amo”; (3) “Barreiro, Gustavo” and “Barreiro, Elvis Gustavo”, who the representatives and the Inter-American Commission have confirmed is the same person and who appears in the Central Bank’s decision as “Elvis Barreiro”; (3) “González Amaro, José” and “González Amaro, Enrique”, who appears in the Central Bank file as “José Enrique González Amaro” and in the respective decision as “José González Amaro”; (4) “Modesta, Nuñez Micaela” and “Núñez, Micaela Modesta”, who appears in the Central Bank’s decision as “Micaela Modesta Nuñez”; (5) “Caligares, Teresa” and “Silka Caligaris, Teresa”, who appears in the Central Bank’s decision as “Teresa Caligaris”; (6) “Berlini, Esmeralda” and “Verlini, Esmeralda”, who the Court understands is the same person and who appears in the Central Bank’s decision as “Esmeralda Verlini”; (7) “Berlini, María Teresa” and “Verlini, María Teresa”, who the Court understands is the same person and who appears in the Central Bank’s decision as “María Teresa Verlini”; (8) “Casavieja, Luis Pablo” and “Casavieja, Pablo”, who appears in the Central Bank file as “Luis Pablo Casavieja” and in the respective decision as “Luis Casavieja”; (9) “Díaz Cabana, Eduardo” and “Diaz Cavanna, Eduardo”, who appears in the respective Central Bank’s decision as “Eduardo Díaz Cabana”; (10) “Denissow, Ana María” and “Dennisow, Ana María”, who appears in the Central Bank’s decision as “Ana María Denissow”; (11) “Everett, Oscar” and “Evert, Oscar”, who appears in the Central Bank’s decision as “Oscar Everett Villamil”; (11) “Kahyaian, Alberto” and “Kahiaian, Minas Alberto”, whose Central Bank file reveals that his complete name is “Minas Alberto Kahiaian Kevorkian”, and who appears in the respective Central Bank’s decision as “Alberto Kahiaian”; (12) “Karamanukian, José” and “Karamanukian, Diego José”, who appears in the Central Bank’s decision as “José Karamanukian”; (13) “Luzardo, Rosa” and “Luzardo Safi, María Rosa”, who appears in the Central Bank’s decision as “María Rosa Luzardo”; (14) “Mendoza, Wilfredo Luis” and “Mendoza, Luis Wilfredo”, who the Court understands is the same person; (15) “Rodríguez, Fernanda” and “Rodríguez, M. Fernanda”, who appears in the Central Bank’s decision as “María Fernanda Rodríguez”; (16) “Roelsgaard, Niels Nelson” and “Roelsgaard, Niels Piter”, who appears in the Central Bank’s decision as “Niels Peter Roelsgaard Papke”; (17) “Scotti Ponce de León, Andrés” and “Scotti, André”, who appears in the Central Bank’s decision as “Andrés Scotti”; (18) “Schermam, Dora” and “Sherman, Dora”, who the Court understands is the same person, and who appears in the table provided by 16