reasons, it was decided that the date on which [the federal and state officials who had been designated to attend the even] could agree was November 17, 2011.” The State indicated that it “considered that it would have the comprehension and the presence of the victims and their representatives” at the said act, because “they had been offered all the material and any other type of assistance to take part in it, given the very high level of representation of the State and that all the requests of the victims and their representatives, without exception, had been satisfied.” B. Arguments of the representatives 8. The representatives indicated that “the State held the public act of acknowledgement ordered by the Court [complying] partially with the elements ordered in the judgment […],” such as implementing it “in a public ceremony,” “in the presence of senior national authorities,” and “to make reparation to Rosendo Radilla Pacheco, in the agreed place, [with] speeches by the officials referring to the human rights violations declared in the judgment […].” Nevertheless, they also indicated that Mexico had “not complied with […] basic elements” required by the Court in this regard, because “it decided the date of the act unilaterally”; namely, November 17, 2011, and because it was not held in the presence of the next of kin of Mr. Radilla Pacheco. The representatives referred to several measures taken by the State previously, in order to hold the public act of acknowledgement of responsibility originally on November 14, 2011. In this regard, they stated that, owing to a discrepancy regarding the Interior Minister’s assistance at the said act, which, according to the representatives had been agreed to by the State, they “assumed that it had been suspended on the day initially programmed,” and this was confirmed by the State following the death, on November 11, 2011, of the officials who would have presided this event. The representatives indicated that “discussions were resumed by the parties, and the Government proposed, initially, to hold the act on November 25 or 18.” However, since “Tita Radilla had commitments abroad during the week of November 25, that she had made several months before and that, in addition, she would receive the Ponciano Arriaga Leija Award from the Human Rights Commission of the Federal District on November 18 in [Mexico City], the Government was asked to consider other dates.” In a letter of November 14, 2011, addressed to the State by the representatives, they also mentioned that “following consultations with the Radilla family, they and their representatives, did not agree that the event [be] held on [November 18, 2011, …] owing to the emotional stress caused by the process [of preparation and cancellation of the public act of acknowledgement of responsibility].” 9. In addition, the representatives asserted that, even though the State had undertaken to hold a meeting on November 18, 2011, to fix a new date for the public act by mutual agreement, the representatives were notified at 2 p.m. on November 16, 2011, that the said act would be held the following morning; and this is what happened, despite the objections of the representatives. In this regard, they indicated that the assistance of the next of kin of Rosendo Radilla Pacheco at the public act of acknowledgement of responsibility would be “materially” impossible, because: (i) the members of the family had scattered and faced “physical difficulty to regroup in less than 24 hours”; (ii) Tita Radilla had scheduled a doctor’s appointment in Acapulco, […] which she could not cancel given her actual state of health,” and (iii) there was a “real difficulty to ensure a timely invitation to attend the act to all the organizations of victims, national and international human rights, and civil society in general that had been invited by the Radilla family and their representatives for the original date […].” 4