4 18. On July 19, 2002, the Inter-American Commission filed the application before the Court (supra para. 1), and appointed Juan Méndez, Marta Altolaguirre and Santiago A. Canton as delegates and Ignacio Álvarez and Pedro Díaz as legal advisers. 19. On July 22, 2002, the State submitted a brief entitled “petition concerning report 36/02 of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights,” in which it requested the Court to declare that Peru had complied with “the standards established by the Convention and by the Court’s case law” in the Lori Berenson case, with regard to which the Commission had issued Report No. 36/02. For this purpose, the State appointed Jorge Villegas Ratti and César Azabache Caracciolo as its agent and deputy agent, respectively. 20. On September 6, 2002, the Court issued an order admitting the Commission’s application and the State’s brief of July 22, 2002, the latter to be processed “within the same proceeding as the application presented by the Commission.” 21. On October 10, 2002, after the President of the Court (hereinafter “the President”) had reviewed the application, the Secretariat of the Court (hereinafter “the Secretariat”) notified it to the State, together with its attachments, and informed the latter of the time allowed for answering it and appointing its representatives for the proceedings. The same day, on the instructions of the President, the Secretariat informed the State of its right to appoint a judge ad hoc to take part in hearing the case. 22. El October 7, 2002, in accordance with the provisions of Article 35(1)(d) and (e) of the Rules of Procedure, the Secretariat notified the Commission’s application (supra para. 18) and the State’s brief of July 22, 2002 (supra para. 19), to Ramsey Clark, in his capacity as original petitioner and representative of the alleged victim, so that, in accordance with Article 35(4) of the Rules of Procedure,2 he could submit his brief with requests, arguments and evidence (hereinafter “requests and arguments brief”) within 30 days. On the instructions of the President, he was granted one month to submit comments on the State’s brief. 23. On October 7, 2002, the Secretariat notified the State’s brief of July 22, 2002 (supra para. 19) to the Commission and, on the instructions of the President, granted it a non-extendible period of one month to submit its comments. 24. On October 31, 2002, the State appointed Juan Federico D. Monroy Gálvez as Judge ad hoc in this case. 25. The representatives of the alleged victim did not submit a requests and arguments brief. However, on November 6, 2002, and on January 7, 2003, they presented two briefs entitled “emergency motions.” In these briefs, they requested that the case should be decided promptly by a final summary judgment to avoid irreparable harm to the alleged victim. On the instruction of the Court, both briefs were rejected by communications from the Secretariat dated December 4, 2002, and 2 Rules of Procedure adopted by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights at its forty-ninth regular session in an order of November 24, 2000, which entered into force on June 1, 2001. This Article, among others, was reformed by the Court at its sixty-first regular session in an order of November 25, 2003. This reform entered into force on January 1, 2004.