20 Morales, Paulina Tecú Morales, Fermina Reyes Reyes, Bairon Estuardo Tejeda Reyes, Delvin Donaldo Tejeda Reyes, Víctor Aníbal Tejeda Reyes, María Elena Tejeda Reyes, Carmen Tejeda Orellana, Gregorio Tejeda Orellana, Bartolo Tejeda Orellana, Isabel Tejeda Orellana, Hilaria Tejeda Orellana, Sabina Tejeda, Mercedes Orellana García, Irena Tejeda Orellana, Odilia Tejeda Orellana, Telma Tejeda Orellana, Daniel Tejeda Orellana, Eulalio Tejeda, Everildo Tejeda, Antonio Tejeda, Guillermo Toj Manuel, and Margarita Iboy. * * * Considerations of the Court 43. Article 53(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court provides that: 2. If the respondent informs the Court of its acquiescence to the claims of the party that has brought the case and of the representatives of the alleged victims, their next of kin or their representatives, the Court, after hearing the opinions of the other parties to the case, will decide whether such acquiescence and its juridical effects are acceptable. In that event, the Court shall determine the appropriate reparations and indemnities. 44. The April 23, 2004 Order of the Court, in its Whereas section, pointed out that: 1. […] the State has waived all the preliminary objections raised in the November 1, 2002 reply to the application. 2. […] the State has acknowledged the facts and its international responsibility for violation of Articles 1(1), 5(1), 5(2), 8(1), 11, 12(2), 12(3), 13(2) paragraph (a), 13(5), 16(1), 21(1), 21(2), 24 and 25 of the American Convention on Human Rights in the instant case. 3. […] said acknowledgment expressed by the State […] does not interrupt the process of receiving evidence ordered with respect to reparations and legal costs. And decided: 1. To deem all the preliminary objections filed by the State withdrawn. 2. To admit the acknowledgment of international responsibility made by the State, under the terms set forth in Whereas two of the [...] Order. 3. To continue the public hearing summoned through the February 19, 2004 Order of the President of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, and to limit its subjectmatter to reparations and legal costs in the instant case. […] 45. Likewise, the Court points out that the Inter-American Commission stated that “the […] purpose of the application is to submit to the jurisdiction of the […] Court the violations committed by agents of the Guatemalan State through denial of justice and other acts of intimidation and discrimination against the survivors and next of kin of the Plan de Sánchez [...] massacre that took place on July 18, 1982.” The representatives of the victims and their next of kin, in turn, pointed out that “the issue to be decided by the [...] Court should be limited to identification of the violations of the Convention committed by the State after its acceptance of the competence of the Court on March 9, 1987.”