-3public information and to judicial protection established in Articles 13 and 25 of the American Convention, respectively, in relation to Articles 1(1) and 2 of the Convention, by denying them access to information held by the Chilean Foreign Investment Committee and by not granting them access to Chilean justice to contest this refusal.” The Commission recommended to the State that it should “disclose the information requested by Marcel Claude Reyes, Sebastián Cox Urrejola and Arturo Longton Guerrero”; “[g]rant adequate reparation to Marcel Claude Reyes, Sebastián Cox Urrejola and Arturo Longton Guerrero for the violation of their rights, including providing them with the requested information”; and “[a]dapt its domestic laws to Article 13 of the American Convention regarding access to information and adopt the necessary measures to establish practices and mechanisms that guarantee effective access to public information and information of public interest to the people of Chile.” 9. On April 8, 2005, the Commission forwarded this report to the State and granted it two months from the date of transmittal to provide information on the measures adopted to comply with the recommendations made therein. 10. On April 8, 2005, the Commission informed the petitioners that it had adopted the report under Article 50 of the Convention and granted them one month to advise it of their position as regards submitting the case to the Court. 11. On June 8, 2005, the State requested an extension to inform the Commission about compliance with the recommendations contained in Report No. 31/05. The Commission granted it an extension until June 23, 2005. 12. On June 15, 2005, the petitioners presented a communication to the Commission expressing their interest in the Commission submitting the case to the Court’s consideration. 13. On June 30, 2005, the State sent a report to the Commission in response to the recommendations made in Report on Merits No. 31/05 (supra para. 8). Chile also forwarded a copy of the foreign investment contracts and assignment contracts relating to the “Río Condor” Project. 14. On July 1, 2005, “in the understanding that the State had not adopted its recommendations satisfactorily,” the Commission decided to submit the case to the Court’s consideration. IV PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COURT 15. On July 8, 2005, the Inter-American Commission submitted the application to the Court, attaching documentary evidence and offering testimonial and expert evidence. The Commission appointed Evelio Fernández Arévalo, Santiago A. Canton and Eduardo Bertoni as delegates and Ariel Dulitzky, Victor H. Madrigal-Borloz, Christina M. Cerna and Lisa Yagel as legal advisers (infra para. 22). 16. On August 4, 2005, after the President of the Court (hereinafter “the President”) had made a preliminary review of the application, pursuant to the provisions of Article 35(1)(b) of the Rules of Procedure, the Secretariat of the Court (hereinafter “the Secretariat”) notified it, together with the appendixes, to the State informing the latter of

Select target paragraph3