2 2. The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the Commission” or “the Inter-American Commission”) presented this case to the Court by means of an application filed on August 8, 1996. On September 20, 1996, the State filed seven preliminary objections, and on September 3, 1998, the Court issued its judgment on them.1 Then, on August 18, 2000, the Court delivered its judgment on the merits of the case, wherein it resolved unanimously, 1. […] that the State violated, to the detriment of Luis Alberto Cantoral-Benavides, Article 5(1) and 5(2) of the American Convention on Human Rights. unanimously, 2. […] that the State violated, to the detriment of Luis Alberto Cantoral-Benavides, Article 7(1), 7(2), 7(3), 7(4) and 7(5) of the American Convention on Human Rights. unanimously, 3. […] that the State violated, to the detriment of Luis Alberto Cantoral-Benavides, Article 8(1) of the American Convention on Human Rights. unanimously, 4. […] that the State violated, to the detriment of Luis Alberto Cantoral Benavides, Article 8(2) of the American Convention on Human Rights. unanimously, 5. […] that the State violated, to the detriment of Luis Alberto Cantoral Benavides, Article 8(2)c), 8(2)d) and 8(2)f) of the American Convention on Human Rights. unanimously, 6. […] that the State violated, to the detriment of Luis Alberto Cantoral-Benavides, Article 8(2)g) and 8(3) of the American Convention on Human Rights. by seven votes to one, 7. […] that the State violated, to the detriment of Luis Alberto Cantoral Benavides, Article 8(5) of the American Convention on Human Rights. Judge Vidal Ramírez dissenting. by seven votes to one, 8. […] that the State violated, to the detriment of Luis Alberto Cantoral Benavides, Article 9 of the American Convention on Human Rights. Judge Vidal Ramírez dissenting. unanimously, 9. […] that the State violated, to the detriment of Luis Alberto Cantoral Benavides, Articles 7(6) and 25(1) of the American Convention on Human Rights. unanimously, 10. […] that the State has not fulfilled the general obligations of Article 1(1) and 2 of the American Convention on Human Rights, in respect of the violations of the substantive rights identified in the preceding operative paragraphs of the […] judgment. 1 No. 40. Cf. Cantoral Benavides Case, Preliminary Objections, Judgment of September 3, 1998. Series C