2 responsible, and to order the payment of reparations for the damages caused. In like manner, that it also declare that the Government of the Republic of Nicaragua has violated Article 2 of the Convention by not having adopted domestic laws intended to ensure such rights and prevent the occurrence of similar incidents in the future. 2. That, on the basis of the principle of pacta sunt servanda it declare that the Government of Nicaragua has violated Article 51(2) of the American Convention by not carrying out the recommendations made by the Commission. 3. That it require the Government of Nicaragua to identify and punish, on the basis of investigations made, those responsible, thereby preventing the consummation of acts of grave impunity that damage the foundations of the legal order. 4. That it declare that the enforceability of Decrees 591 and 600, known as "Law on the Organization of the Military Judge Advocate and Military Criminal Procedure," and "Provisional Military Criminal Law," which govern military criminal jurisdiction, are incompatible with the object and purpose of the American Convention on Human Rights and that they must be adjusted to the latter in conformity with the commitments acquired pursuant to Article 2 thereof. 5. That it declare that the Government of Nicaragua must provide, in accordance with Article 63(1) of the Convention, repare and compensate the next of kin of the victims for the acts committed by State agents as described in this complaint. 6. That the State of Nicaragua be sentenced to pay court costs and attorneys' fees in relationship to this action. 3. In submitting the case to the Court, the Commission invoked Articles 50 and 51 of the American Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter the "Convention" or the "American Convention") and 26 and subsequent articles of the Rules of Procedure. It designated Michael Reisman, First Vice President, as delegate, and Edith Márquez-Rodríguez, Executive Secretary, and Milton Castillo, an attorney of the Secretariat, as attorneys. It also designated Robert K. Goldman as Adviser, and José Miguel Vivanco as assistant, accredited "as the attorney representing the victim." 4. By note of January 21, 1994, the Court Secretariat (hereinafter the "Secretariat"), after the President of the Court (hereinafter the "President") concluded his preliminary study, notified the Government of Nicaragua of the case. The Court informed the Government that it had three months to file a written answer to the application (Art. 29(1) of the Rules of Procedure) and 30 days following notification of the application to file preliminary objections (Art. 31(1) of the Rules of Procedure). On February 3, 1994, the Government informed the Court of its designation of Ambassador José Antonio Tijerino-Medrano as agent. It also named Marco Gerardo Monroy-Cabra as Adviser and Carlos José Hernández-López and Víctor Manuel Ordóñez as Assistants. 5. On February 7, 1994, the President, at the request of the Government, granted the latter an extension of 90 days to answer the complaint and an additional term of 30 days to file preliminary objections. 6. On March 21, 1994, Nicaragua interposed the following preliminary objections: First. Lack of jurisdiction of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. Second. Lack of the admissibility requirements as provided for in Article 46 of the American Convention on Human Rights. Third. Procedural errors by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in the handling of the case and in the complaint submitted to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. Fourth. Undue accumulation of petitions in the complaint submitted by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights.