I INTRODUCTION OF THE CASE AND PURPOSE OF THE DISPUTE 1. The case submitted to the Court. On April 18, 2019, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the Inter-American Commission” or “the Commission”) submitted to the jurisdiction of the Court the case of José Delfín Acosta Martínez and family regarding the Argentine Republic (hereinafter also “the State” or “Argentina”). The Commission indicated that the case was related to the illegal and arbitrary detention and subsequent death of José Delfín Acosta Martínez (hereinafter also “Mr. Acosta Martínez” or the “alleged victim”), which took place on April 5, 1996. The Commission asked that the State be found responsible for the violation of the rights to life, personal integrity, personal liberty, equality, and non-discrimination, enshrined in Articles 4(1), 5(1), 5(2), 7(2), 7(3), 7(4), and 24 of the American Convention on Human Rights, in relation to Articles 1(1) and 2 of the same instrument, to the detriment of the alleged victim. Likewise, it asked that Argentina be declared internationally responsible for the violation of the rights to personal integrity, judicial guarantees and judicial protection established in Articles 5(1), 8(1), and 25(1) of the Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) of the same instrument, to the detriment of the next of kin of José Delfín Acosta Martínez.1 2. Procedure before the Commission. The procedure before the Commission was as follows: a) Petition. On June 6, 2002, the Comisión de familiares de víctimas de la violencia social (COFAVI), together with the Centro de Investigaciones Sociales y Asesorías Legales Populares (CISALP) and Paola Gabriela Canova, filed a petition on behalf of the alleged victims alleging State responsibility to the detriment of José Delfín Acosta Martínez. b) Admissibility Report. On July 11, 2013, the Commission adopted Admissibility Report 36/13. c) Report on the Merits. On December 7, 2018, the Commission approved Report on the Merits 146/18, in which it reached a series of conclusions 2 and made several recommendations to the State. 3. Notification to the State. The Report on the Merits was notified to the State in a communication dated January 18, 2019, giving it two months to report on compliance with the recommendations. On March 21, 2019, the Commission granted the State an extension to present its compliance report and, on April 3, 2019, a working meeting was held between the parties. At that meeting, the State presented the petitioner with a proposal on compliance with the recommendations. However, the petitioner found it insufficient and asked the Commission to send the case to the Court. As of the date the case was submitted, the State had not submitted a report on compliance to the Commission, nor had it requested suspension of the deadline set in Article 51(1) of the Convention. 1 The relatives are his mother, Blanca Rosa Martínez, and his brother, Ángel Acosta Martínez. The Commission concluded that the State was responsible for the violation of the rights established in Articles 4(1), 5(1), 5(2), 7(1), 7(2), 7(3), 7(4), 7(5) and 24 of the American Convention in relation to the obligations established in Articles 1(1) and 2 of the same instrument, to the detriment of José Delfín Acosta Martínez. It also concluded that the State was responsible for the violation of the rights enshrined in Articles 5(1), 8(1) and 25(1) of the Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) of the same instrument, to the detriment of the relatives of José Delfín Acosta Martínez. 2 4