II PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COURT 4. Notification to the State and the representatives or common interveners. On March 27, 2015, the case was notified to the Republic of Costa Rica (hereinafter “the State” or “Costa Rica”), and to the representatives or common interveners of the alleged victims (hereinafter “the representatives” or “common interveners”): i) Adrián Martínez Blanco of Factum Consorcio; ii) Servicios Interamericanos de Profesionales en Derechos Humanos (hereinafter “SIPDH”), and iii) the Inter-American Defenders, José Arnoldo González Castro, Tomás Poblador Ramírez and Belinda Guevara Casaya. 4 5. Brief with pleadings, motions and evidence. On June 1 and 8, 2015, the Court received briefs containing pleadings, motions and evidence (hereinafter “pleadings and motions brief”) from Factum Consorcio, SIPDH and the Inter-American Defenders. In their briefs, they agreed with the arguments submitted by the Commission and, in each case, they argued additional violations of the American Convention in relation to Articles 2, 4(1), 5, 5(1), 5(2), 5(6), 7(3), 7(6), 8(1), 8(2), 8(2)(c), 8(2)(d), 8(2)(f), 9, 11, 23(c), 24 and 25. 6. Answering brief. On February 5, 2016, the State presented to the Court a brief containing preliminary objections, its answer to the submission of the case and observations on the pleadings and motions briefs (hereinafter “answering brief”). The State filed five preliminary objections and rejected the alleged violations. 5 It also requested that a special hearing be held on the preliminary objections. 7. Observations on the preliminary objections. On April 8, 12 and 13, 2016, the three common interveners and the Commission presented their respective observations on the preliminary objections filed by the State. The Commission, the Inter-American Defenders and SIPDH also submitted annexes to their briefs of observations on the preliminary objections, which were forwarded to the parties and the Commission. The President of the Court granted a period until December 13, 2016, for the parties and the Commission to submit any observations deemed pertinent to said annexes. No observations were submitted. 6 8. Request for a special hearing on preliminary objections. On August 17, 2016, after a query from the President of the Court, 7 the State explained the reasons why it considered it indispensable to hold a special hearing on preliminary objections. For their part, on August 30, 31, and September 1, 2016, the three common interveners and the Commission submitted their respective observations to the brief of the State. Mr. Adrián Martínez Blanco of Factum Consorcio, represented Jorge Martínez Meléndez, of Group 4. SIPDH represented Groups 1, 3 (except the alleged victim Fernando Saldarriaga Saldarriaga), 7 and 8. The InterAmerican Defenders González Castro and Poblador Ramírez represented Fernando Saldarriaga Saldarriaga, of Group 3, Guillermo Rodríguez Silva and Martín Rojas Hernández, of Group 5, while the Inter-American Defender Guevara Casaya represented Rafael Antonio Rojas Madrigal, of Group 2, and Manuel Adilio Hernández Quesada, of Group 6. 5 On April 24, 2015, the State appointed the following persons as its agents in the instant case: Manuel A. González Sanz, Minister of Foreign Relations; Gioconda Ubeda Rivera, Legal Director, Ministry of Foreign Relations; and José Manuel Arroyo Gutiérrez, Magistrate of the Third Chamber, Vice President of the Supreme Court of Justice. Likewise, on December 13, 2016, the State appointed as additional agent for this case Eugenia Gutiérrez Ruiz, Assistant Legal Director of the Ministry of Foreign Relations. 6 The common intervenor SIPDH filed a brief in which it merely “reiterated” and “reproduced” its observations on the preliminary objections filed by the State, without submitting observations in relation to the aforementioned annexes. 7 Note of the Secretariat of August 4, 2016 (merits file, folio 1994). 4 8