I INTRODUCTION OF THE CASE AND CAUSE OF ACTION 1. The case submitted to the Court. – On May 24, 2020, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the Inter-American Commission” or “the Commission”) submitted to the jurisdiction of the Court the case of “Diana Maidanik et al.” against the Eastern Republic of Uruguay (hereinafter “the State” or “Uruguay”). According to the Commission, the case concerns the alleged failure to investigate and punish the extrajudicial executions, on April 21, 1974, of Diana Maidanik, Silvia Reyes and Laura Raggio, which was popularly known as “the case of the girls of April.” The Commission indicated that the three women were murdered while in the apartment of Laura Raggio, in Montevideo, in an operation carried out by members of the Armed Forces and the police. The case also concerns the alleged forced disappearances of Luis Eduardo González González and Óscar Tassino Asteazu, on December 13, 1974, and July 19, 1977, respectively. The Commission maintained that the failure to investigate and punish those disappearances, as well as the three extrajudicial executions, continues to the present day. It, therefore, concluded that the rights to juridical personality, to life, to personal integrity, to personal liberty, to judicial guarantees and to judicial protection had been violated. The Commission also considered that the State was responsible for the violation of Article I (a), (b) and (c) of the Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearance of Persons (hereinafter also “IACFDP”). 2. The following proceedings took place before the Commission: a) Petition. – On August 15, 2007, the Institute of Legal and Social Studies of Uruguay (IELSUR) lodged the initial petition. b) Admissibility Report. – On November 8, 2012, the Commission adopted Admissibility Report No. 90/12, by which it admitted the petition. c) Report on the Merits. – On November 9, 2019, the Commission adopted the Report on the Merits No. 169/19 (hereinafter also “Merits Report”), in which it reached a series of conclusions1 and made various recommendations to the State. d) Notification to the State. – The Report on the Merits was notified to the State on February 24, 2020. The Commission granted Uruguay two months to inform on the compliance with its recommendations. The Commission indicated that, on May 14, 2020, the State requested an extension without renouncing its right to present a preliminary objection for the failure to comply with the term established in Article 51(1) of the Convention regarding the submission of a case to the Court. 3. Submission to the Court. – On May 24, 2020, the Commission submitted to the Court “the State acts and omissions that occurred or that continued to occur after April 19, 1985.”2 It indicated that it did so “due to the necessity of obtaining justice and The Commission concluded that the State was responsible for the violation of Articles 3 (right to juridical personality), 4(1) (right to life), 5(1) (right to humane treatment), 7 (right to personal liberty), 8(1) (right to a fair trial) and 25(1) (right to judicial protection) of the American Convention, read in conjunction with Articles 1(1) and 2 thereof (obligation to respect and ensure rights). It also determined that Uruguay violated Article I(a), (b) and (c) of the Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearance of Persons. 2 The Commission specified that such actions included: (a) “the forced disappearances of Luis Eduardo González González and Óscar Tassino Asteazu”; (b) “the failure to investigate and punish those disappearances, was well as the extrajudicial executions of Diana Maidanik, Silvia Reyes and Laura Raggio Odizzio,” and (c) “the failure to adequately repair.” 1 5