3 4. On March 29, 1996 the Commission opened the case as No. 11.603. On September 27, 1999 the Commission declared the case to be admissible. In the Report on Admissibility, the Commission placed itself at the disposal of the parties to seek a friendly settlement. 5. On December 16, 1999 the petitioners filed with the Commission a proposal for a friendly settlement, which was forwarded to the State for it to make its observations. On January 21, 2000 the State sent a brief in which it referred to the Admissibility Report, and this brief was forwarded to the petitioners. 6. On March 2, 2000 the Commission held a hearing to analyze the possibility of reaching a friendly settlement. According to the Commission, the State expressed that it could not recognize its responsibility because the definitive judgments of the domestic courts did not demonstrate responsibility of State agents for the facts alleged. Furthermore, the State pointed out that the next of kin of the alleged victims would receive reparations if the administrative law courts so decided. The petitioners, in turn, decided to consider the attempt to attain a friendly settlement ended. 7. In their March 31, 2000 brief, the petitioners submitted a “written exposition of the arguments” made during the aforementioned hearing. This brief was forwarded to the State, whose observations were submitted on June 30, 2000. 8. On October 4, 2000 the Commission adopted Report No. 76/00, in which it recommended that the State: 1. Conduct a complete, impartial, and effective investigation under regular court jurisdiction so as to try and punish those responsible for the extrajudicial execution of Alvaro Lobo Pacheco, Gerson Rodríguez, Israel Pundor, Angel Barrera, Antonio Flores Ochoa, Carlos Arturo Riatiga, Victor Ayala, Alirio Chaparro, Huber Pérez, Alvaro Camargo, Rubén Pineda, Gilberto Ortíz, Reinaldo Corso Vargas, Hernán Jáuregui, Juan Bautista, Alberto Gómez, Luis Sauza, Juan Montero and Ferney Fernández. 2. Adopt all necessary measures for the next of kin of the victims to receive [an] adequate and timely reparation for the violations [...]established. 3. Take all necessary measures to comply with the doctrine developed by the Colombian Constitutional Court and by this Commission regarding investigation and trial of similar cases by regular criminal justice. 9. On October 24, 2000 the Commission transmitted the aforementioned report to the State and gave it a two-month period, commencing on the date of transmittal of that report, to provide information on steps taken to comply with the recommendations made. On December 22, 2000 the State requested an extension of the period to reply to Report No. 76/00, and an extension of the deadline to January 19, 2001 was granted. On that day, the State transmitted its reply to the Commission, and the Commission decided that same day to submit the instant case to the jurisdiction of the Court. IV PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COURT 10. On January 24, the Inter-American Commission filed its application as follows: