I INTRODUCTION OF THE CASE AND PURPOSE OF THE DISPUTE 1. The case submitted to the Court. On March 5, 2014, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the Inter-American Commission” or “the Commission”) submitted the case to the jurisdiction of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (hereinafter “the InterAmerican Court” or “the Court”) against the Republic of Guatemala (hereinafter “the State” or “Guatemala”). According to the Commission, the case relates to the presumed responsibility of the State for failing to comply with the obligation to protect the life and personal integrity of Claudina Isabel Velásquez Paiz. Regarding the facts, the Commission indicated that, when the presumed victim did not return home on August 12, 2005, her parents, Jorge Rolando Velásquez Durán and Elsa Claudina Paiz Vidal, went to report her disappearance. However, they were unable to do so because they were told that they would have to wait 24 hours to report this fact. Even though the State authorities were aware of the existence of a context of violence against women that clearly placed her in imminent danger, the State failed to take immediate and exhaustive measures to find and protect her within the initial hours after learning that she was missing. The body of the presumed victim was found the following day with signs of presumably having been subjected to extreme violence, including sexual violence. 2. The Commission alleged that the State had incurred international responsibility because it had failed to conduct a serious investigation into the disappearance, the sexual violence and murder of Claudina Isabel Velásquez Paiz. It indicated that, from the outset, the investigation was riddled with errors such as flaws in the handling and analysis of the evidence collected, and shortcomings in managing and preserving the crime scene and in the tests run on the evidence; irregularities in the autopsy report, a failure to perform a thorough examination of various parts of the victim’s body to confirm a possible rape; irregularities in the fingerprinting of the victim, and the failure to take statements from important witnesses. The Commission also found that the delay in the proceedings could be attributed to the State, particularly owing to the constant changes in the prosecutors assigned to the case, which disrupted the investigation and meant that procedures were not carried out on time of were not taken into consideration by the new prosecutors. Lastly, it found presumed discriminatory stereotyping during the proceedings that had a negative impact on the lack of diligence in the investigation. The Commission considered that the failure to protect the presumed victim and the failure to investigate her death were a clear reflection of the underlying situation of discrimination against women in Guatemala. Finally, the Commission alleged the violation of the right to personal integrity of her parents and also her brother, Pablo Andrés Velásquez Paiz. 3. Process before the Commission. The process before the Commission was as follows: a) Petition. On December 10, 2007, the Guatemalan Instituto de Estudios Comparados en Ciencias Penales, Jorge Rolando Velásquez Durán and Carlos Antonio Pop AC lodged the initial petition before the Commission. b) Admissibility Report. On October 4, 2010, the Commission adopted Admissibility Report No. 110/10. c) Merits Report. On November 4, 2013, the Commission adopted Merits Report No. 53/13 pursuant to Article 50 of the Convention (hereinafter “the Merits Report” or “Report No. 53/13”), in which it reached a series of conclusions and made several recommendations to the State. Conclusions. The Commission concluded that the State was responsible for violating the following rights: 4