7 37. 3 Acknowledge[d] its international responsibility for violation of Articles 1(1), 5(1), 5(2), 8(1), 11, 16(1), 21(1), 21(2), 24 and 25 of the American Convention [on] Human Rights; without establishing the private or individual responsibility of the alleged perpetrators. 4. Acknowledge[d] its international responsibility for violation of Article 12(2), 12(3), 13(2) paragraph (a) and 13(5) for not ensuring the right of the next of kin of the [...] victims and members of the community to express their religious, spiritual, and cultural beliefs. 5. […] d[id] not address the issue of genocide raised in the application by the […] Commission and the petitioners, because it is not the subject matter of the American Convention [on] Human Rights. 6. Based on Article 54 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court, […] it expresse[d] its willingness to redress the consequences of these violations, for which it request[ed] that the [...]Inter-American Court begin a friendly settlement process regarding reparations, with the Inter-American Commission and the representatives of the […] victims, so that within one year’s time they can discuss and agree upon the appropriate measures of reparation. 7. In case […] the State’s request to reach a friendly settlement were not accepted, […] it ask[ed] the […] Court, within the framework of the adjudicatory proceeding, to conclude the hearing on the merits, and that the testimony and expert opinions ordered should now provide information to the […] Court regarding appropriate reparations. 8. If the State is forced to financially compensate the [...] victims and their next of kin, [...] it ask[ed] the […] Court, in light of the country’s fiscal deficit, to begin the process of compensation by the State in 2005, once the lists of the [...] victims and their next of kin have been checked for accuracy, in accordance with the domestic legal provisions of the State. During the first public hearing, Guatemala also stated that: pursuant to the Rules of Procedure and the applications in the file, [it has] stated [...] not only verbally[,] but also in writing, [...] that it acknowledges the responsibility made by the [previous] President of the Republic […], in accordance with the application by the […] Commission and the brief with pleadings, motions, and evidence] of the representatives of the […] victims. [The State] specifie[d] the aspects regarding which it acknowledges[...its] international responsibility […] and [expressed that it had] explicitly[…] stated [the] Articles that it deems breached by the State, which were also included in the applications by the parties. 38. In the second brief submitted by the State on April 23, 2004, once the position of the Commission and of the representatives regarding its acknowledgment of international responsibility was known (supra para. 31), it pointed out that, regarding the statement by “the representatives of the […] victims, […] the ideas stated regarding the existence of a genocidal policy are the representatives’ own opinions or interpretations, for which reason [...] it reiterate[d] the content of paragraph 5 of the statement made at the beginning of the hearing.” Finally, at the public hearing Guatemala expressed “its deep regret for the facts that took place at and were suffered by the community of Plan de Sánchez, on July 18, 1982, for which reason on behalf of the State it apologize[d] to the victims, the survivors and the next of kin; as a first demonstration of respect, reparation, and as a guarantee of non recidivism.”