with concern that more than 19 years have elapsed between the presentation of the initial petition before the Commission and the submission of this case to the Court. II PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COURT 6. Notification to the State and the representatives. The State and the representatives of the alleged victims were notified of the submission of the case on February 11, 2019. 7. Brief with pleadings, motions and evidence. On November 11, 2019, the representative of the alleged victim (hereinafter “the representative”)3 presented her brief with pleadings, motions, and evidence (hereinafter “pleadings and motions brief”) pursuant to Articles 25 and 40 of the Court’s Rules of Procedure. The representative agreed with what the Commission had alleged and asked that the State be ordered to adopt a series of measures of reparation, in particular measures of non-repetition and to reimburse costs and expenses. 8. Answering brief. On February 5, 2020, the State4 submitted to the Court its brief answering the Commission’s submission of the case, together with its observations on the pleadings and motions brief (hereinafter “answering brief”). In its brief, the State recognized the conclusions of the Report on the Merits presented by the Commission, accepting its international responsibility pursuant to the terms indicated below (infra Chapter IV). 9. Observations on acknowledgement of responsibility. In briefs submitted on March 2, 2020, the Commission and the representative submitted, separately, their observations on the State’s recognition of responsibility. 10. Final written argument. On July 30, 2020, the President issued an Order5 whereby, taking into consideration the situation caused by the pandemic due to the spread of COVID-19, pursuant to the principle of procedural economy and the power granted to it by Article 50(1) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court, it decided not to call a public hearing in the present case and request the statements of the alleged victim and two expert witnesses by affidavit.6 The State submitted its expert witness report on August 27, 2020; the representative submitted her statement on August 28, 2020; and lastly, the Commission submitted its expert witness report on August 31, 2020. 11. Final written arguments and observations. On September 28, 2020, the representatives presented their final written arguments, along with a number of annexes. Likewise, on September 30, 2020, the State submitted its final written arguments. Lastly, the Commission submitted its final written observations on September 30, 2020. The documentation presented in the annex by Mr. Octavio Carsen and Ms. Myriam Carsen acted as the alleged victim’s representatives before the Commission. Later, as a result of the poor health and subsequent death of Ottavio Carson, a note was received by the Secretariat of the Court on November 4, 2020, indicating that Myriam Carsen would be the exclusive representative before the Court. 3 The State appointed Alberto Javier Salgado, Director of International Human Rights Litigation of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Culture, as its lead agent and Gonzalo Luis Bueno, legal counsel of the Office International Human Rights Litigation of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Culture as alternate agent. 4 Cf. Case of Almeida v. Argentina. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of July 30, 2020. Available at: http://www.corteidh.or.cr/docs/asuntos/almeida_30_07_20.pdf. 5 Requested were the statement of the alleged victim, collected ex officio by the Court, and the expert witness reports of Roberto P. Saba—proposed by the Commission—and María José Guembe—proposed by the State. 6 4