preclude other types of acts of the State, including its internal acts or those carried out in other international forums, from having international effects in this sense. Furthermore, it has been considered that the acts of recognition carried out during the proceedings before the Commission are necessarily relevant for determining the application of the principle of estoppel as to opposing positions alleged during the proceedings of the case before the Court.11 30. In that order of ideas, case law has required that, in order to consider an act of the State to be a forced entry or acknowledgment of responsibility, its intention to that effect must be clear; therefore, analysis of the acts of acknowledgment of responsibility is carried out on a case-by-case basis.12 Additionally, it is necessary to examine the nature and characteristics of the State's declarations, as well as the circumstances in which they were made. 13 31. In response to the representatives' arguments, the Court indicates that in May 2007, the Office of the President of Ecuador created the Truth Commission to "investigate, clarify, and prevent impunity of violent acts and human rights violations that occurred between 1984 and 1988 and other periods.” The aforementioned Truth Commission, whose objectives included “[p]romoting recognition of the victims of said violations and designing reparation policies,” presented its final report in June 2010, in which it included what was called the “Casierra Case,” referring to the facts that gave rise to the instant case14 (infra paras. 89 , 90, and 91). 32. Subsequently, in 2013, the Law for the reparation of victims and the prosecution of serious human rights violations and crimes against humanity that occurred in Ecuador between October 4, 1983, and December 31, 2008, was passed ( hereinafter, also “Law for the Reparation of Victims”), providing as follows in article 2: Acknowledgment of the State's responsibility. The Ecuadorian State recognizes its objective responsibility for the human rights violations documented by the Truth Commission and recognizes that the victims suffered unjustifiable violations against their life, liberty, integrity, and dignity. As a result, both such victims and Ecuadorian society must immediately be granted the right to know the truth of the facts, along with access to justice, reparations, and a guarantee that such events will not be repeated. The Ecuadorian State will be responsible for any judicial error, unjustified delay, or inadequate administration of justice, violation of the right to effective judicial protection, and for violations of the principles and rules of due process documented by the Truth Commission, and will make comprehensive reparations to people who have suffered violations of human rights15. 33. Furthermore, as this Court pointed out in the case Vasquez Durand et al. v. Ecuador, the first thing that stands out from the cited law is that its regulation does not expressly mention the intention that the acknowledgment of responsibility binds the State internationally. Second, among other issues, the regulations are aimed at “recognizing […] the right […] [to] proceedings and at the appropriate procedural moment, whether to accept that acquiescence, and shall rule upon its juridical effects. 11 Cf. Case of Acevedo-Buendía et al. (“Discharged and Retired Employees of the Office of the Comptroller”) v. Peru. Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of November 24, 2009. Series C No. 198, para. 59; Case of Vásquez Durand et al. v. Ecuador. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of February 15, 2017. Series C No. 332, para. 46, and Case of Munárriz Escober et al. v. Peru Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of August 20, 2018. Series C No. 355. para. 23. 12 Cf. Case of Gelman v. Uruguay. Merits and Reparations. Judgment of February 24, 2011. Series C No. 221, para. 28, and Case of Munárriz Escober et al. v. Ecuador, supra, para. 24. 13 Cf. Case of Vásquez Durand et al. v. Ecuador, supra, para. 48. 14 Cf. Truth Commission Report. Volume I: Human Rights Violations. Ecuador, 2010, pg. 13 (evidence file, volume IV, annex 7 to the pleadings and motions brief, folio 2273). 15 Law for the reparation of victims and the prosecution of serious human rights violations and crimes against humanity that occurred in Ecuador between October 4, 1983, and December 31, 2008, published on December 13, 2013. Cf. Brief with pleadings and motions (merits file, volume III, folio 711), and answering brief (merits file, volume IV, folios 888 and 889). 9