4 I INTRODUCTION OF THE CASE AND PURPOSE OF THE DISPUTE 1. The case submitted to the Court. On November 28, 2015, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the Commission,” “the Inter-American Commission” or “the IACHR”) submitted the case of Lagos del Campo versus the Republic of Peru (hereinafter “the State” or “Peru”) to the jurisdiction of the Inter-American Court. According to the Commission, the case relates to the dismissal of Alfredo Lagos del Campo (hereinafter “Mr. Lagos del Campo”) on June 26, 1989, as a result of statements he made as president of the Electoral Committee of the Industrial Community of the Ceper-Pirelli company. According to the Commission, the purpose of the statements made by Mr. Lagos del Campo was to denounce and call attention to acts of undue interference by the employers in the life of the organizations that represented the company’s workers, and in the elections held within the Comunidad Industrial. The dismissal was confirmed by Peru’s domestic courts. Also, “[t]he Commission determined that the dismissal of Mr. Lagos del Campo constituted arbitrary interference in the exercise of the right to freedom of expression […]. The Commission determined that the most severe punishment provided for by law was applied with significant effects on the [presumed] victim’s freedom of expression as a leader of workers and on the collective right of workers to receive information on matters that concern them.” Lastly, in its Merits Report, the Commission indicated that, in this case, it was necessary to determine whether the State had complied with its duty to guarantee the presumed victim’s rights in the context of labor relations, bearing in mind the scope of the rights recognized in the American Convention. 2. Procedure before the Commission. The procedure before the Commission was as follows: a) Petition. On August 5, 1998, the Commission received a petition lodged by the presumed victim, Mr. Lagos del Campo, in which he indicated that Peru was internationally responsible for failing to protect his right, as a labor leader, to express opinions in the context of an electoral labor dispute. Subsequently, the Asociación Pro Derechos Humanos (APRODEH) (hereinafter, “the petitioners”), became the representative of the presumed victim in the case. b) Admissibility Report. On November 1, 2010, the Commission issued Admissibility Report No. 152/10 (hereinafter “the Admissibility Report”), in which it concluded that the petition was admissible in relation to Articles 8 and 13 of the American Convention, in relation to Articles 1(1) and 2 of this instrument, to the detriment of Mr. Lagos del Campo. The Commission also declared that the petition was inadmissible with regard to the possible violation of Articles 24 and 25 of the Convention. c) Merits Report. On July 21, 2015, the Commission adopted Merits Report No. 27/15, pursuant to Article 50 of the American Convention (hereinafter “the Merits Report” or “Report 27/15”), in which it reached the following conclusion and made several recommendations to the State, as follows: Conclusion: i) The State is responsible for the violation of the rights to a fair trial and to freedom of expression pursuant to Articles 8(1) and 13 of the American Convention in relation to Articles 1(1), 2 and 16(1) of this instrument, to the detriment of Mr. Lagos del Campo. Recommendations: i) Provide comprehensive reparation to Mr. Lagos del Campo for the violations declared in the report. This reparation should include both the pecuniary and the non-pecuniary aspects; ii) Adopt measures of non-repetition to guarantee that workers’ representatives and labor union leaders can enjoy their right to freedom of expression in accordance with the standards established in this report, and