The Commission has designated Commissioner Rose Marie B. Antoine and the Executive Secretary of the IACHR, Emilio Álvarez Icaza L., as its delegates. Likewise, Elizabeth Abi-Mershed, Assistant Executive Secretary, and Silvia Serrano Guzmán, María Claudia Pulido, and Norma Colledani, attorneys of the Executive Secretariat of the IACHR, will serve as legal advisors. In accordance with Article 35 of the Rules of Procedure of the Inter-American Court, the Commission has attached hereto a copy of Report 119/13, prepared in compliance with Article 50 of the Convention, together with a copy of the complete record of the case before the Inter-American Commission (Appendix I) and the documents used in the preparation of Report 119/13 (Annexes). Said report on the merits was notified to the State of Chile in a communication dated November 12, 2013, and transmitted to it on November 13 of the same year. The report gave the State two months to report on compliance with the recommendations. On January 7, 2014, the State requested a two-month extension, which the Commission granted. On March 27 and April 11, 2014, the Chilean State submitted reports that did not show any substantive progress in the implementation of recommendations. Thus, the information provided on the two criminal proceedings predates the report on the merits. As concerns the cases not yet brought to trial, the State indicated that proceedings must be set in motion by the petitioners themselves which, in the Commission’s view, constitutes a continuing breach of the obligation to investigate acts of torture ex officio. With regard to the duty to investigate the officials who failed to launch investigations, the State simply noted that, in making said recommendation, the Commission was ignoring that individual liability could not be established. As regards the key recommendation in the case, i.e., that there must be an effective remedy concerning convictions that would enable the exclusionary rule to be enforced in respect of evidence obtained under torture, the State merely indicated that the victims could file a “new motion to reopen the case,” without making specific comments on the fact that the violation determined by the Commission stemmed specifically from the fact that the Supreme Court of Justice had declared itself incompetent to nullify the Court Martial’s decisions. Lastly, with respect to reparations, the State reported on reparations received under the national program on reparations for torture victims, a matter that is not the subject of the case. The State did not report on reparation measures implemented as a result of violations in the case, specifically the various components of the denial of justice as described in the report on the merits. The State did not request a new extension to fulfill with the recommendations. Under those circumstances, and in view of the need to obtain justice for the victims in the case, the Commission decided to submit it to the Inter-American Court. The Inter-American Commission requests that the Court conclude and declare that: 1. The Chilean State is responsible for violation of its obligation to investigate torture in accordance with the provisions of articles 8 and 25 of the American Convention, read in conjunction with Article 1(1) thereof and to the detriment of the victims and their next of kin. In application of the principle of iura novit curiae, the Commission also finds that the State is responsible for violation of articles 1, 6, and 8 of the Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture, and for violation of its obligation under the American Convention to adopt domestic legal measures (Article 2), to the detriment of the victims and their next of kin. 2