2 The Commission has designated Commissioner José Orozco Henríquez and Emilio Álvarez Icaza L., Executive Secretary, as its delegate. Likewise, Elizabeth Abi-Mershed, Deputy Executive Secretary, Silvia Serrano Guzmán, attorney of the Executive Secretariat of the IACHR, have been designated to serve as legal advisors. In accordance with Article 35 of the Rules of Procedure of the Inter-American Court, the Commission is enclosing a copy of Merits Report No. 78/13, prepared in compliance with Article 50 of the American Convention, as well as a copy of the entire file before the Inter-American Commission (Appendix I.) and the attachments used to prepare the Report on the Merits (Attachment). The Commission adopted its Report on the Merits No. 78/13 on July 18, 2012 and transmitted to the State on July 30, 2013, granting it two months to provide information on the measures adopted in compliance with the recommendations The State of Peru submitted a document on September 30, 2013, indicating that it disagrees with the findings of the Merits Report. In this regard, the Commission is not provided with information about advances in the fulfillment of the recommendations. By contrast, the State of Peru reiterated that the extradition process continues without being resolved by the Executive. In its communication, the State did not refer to the effects of the judgments of the Constitutional Court ordered the Executive to refrain from extraditing Wong Ho Wing to the People's Republic of China The Commission submits this case to the jurisdiction of the Court because of the need to obtain justice for the victims of this case. The Commission submits all the facts and violations of human rights described on the Merits Report 78/13 The Inter-American Commission concluded that the State of Peru was responsible for violating Mr. Wong Ho Wing’s rights to personal liberty, life, humane treatment, a fair trial, and judicial protection, as set forth in Articles 7, 4, 5, 8, and 25 of the American Convention, in conjunction with the obligations set out in Article 1.1 thereof. In consideration of those conclusions, the Commission recommended that the State: 1. Order the measures necessary to ensure that the extradition process is brought to a conclusion as soon as possible, in accordance with the procedures set forth in the Peruvian Code of Criminal Procedure, denying the extradition in strict compliance with the Constitutional Court’s ruling of May 24, 2011. In furtherance of this recommendation the State must ensure that none of its authorities put into practice mechanisms that would obstruct or delay enforcement of that ruling 2. Order an ex officio review of Mr. Wong Ho Wing’s provisional arrest. In that review the State must take into consideration his legal situation upon the conclusion of the extradition process, effected in accordance with the terms of the recommendation made above. In particular, any court decision pertaining to the personal liberty of Mr. Wong Ho Wing must be made in strict compliance with the principles of exceptionality, necessity, and proportionality in the terms described in this report. 3. Make full reparations to Mr. Wong Ho Wing for the violations established in this merits report. 4. Within a reasonable period, order measures of non-repetition to ensure that in extradition processes, the procedures established in the Code of Criminal Procedure are followed to the letter and that the necessary safeguards are in place to ensure that any diplomatic or other assurances offered by the requesting State are procured and weighed in accordance with the standards set out in the present report on the merits.

Select target paragraph3