4 3. Submission of the case to the Court. On November 30, 2017, the Commission submitted to the Court all the facts and alleged human rights violations described in the Report on Admissibility and Merits. 4. Request of the Inter-American Commission. Based on the foregoing, the Commission asked the Court to conclude and declare the international responsibility of Guatemala for the alleged violation of the rights indicated in the conclusions to the Report on Admissibility and Merits. Additionally, the Commission asked the Court to order the State to provide certain measures of reparation that will be described and analyzed in the corresponding chapter. II PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COURT 5. Appointment of inter-American public defenders. In its brief submitting the case, the Commission indicated that the Centro de Acción Legal en Derechos Humanos had acted as the petitioners’ representative. In communications of January 8 and 19, 2018, addressed to the CALDH, the Court asked it to confirm that it was representing the alleged victims. However, on January 24, 2018, the CALDH advised that it had been unable to communicate with the families of either of the alleged victims and that, based on its institutional policy, it could not continue to represent them before the Court. Following communications with the InterAmerican Association of Public Defenders (AIDEF),2 on February 27, 2018, the Association’s General Coordinator advised the Court that Lorena Padován and Johanny Castillo Sabari (hereinafter “the representatives”) had been appointed inter-American public defenders to provide legal representation for Messrs. Girón and Castillo. 6. Notification of the case to the State and to the representatives. The Court notified the submission of the case by the Commission to the State and to the representatives on March 5 and 6, 2018, respectively. 7. Brief with pleadings, motions and evidence. On May 4, 2018, the representatives presented their brief with pleadings, motions and evidence (hereinafter also “pleadings and motions brief”) together with its annexes. The representatives agreed substantially with the Commission’s arguments and conclusions and also alleged the violation of Article 8(1), 8(2) paragraphs (d), (f), (g) and (h), 8(3), and 8(5) of the American Convention, to the detriment of the alleged victims. They added that the State was responsible for the violation of Article 5(1) and 5(2) of the American Convention, in relation to Articles 8(1), 1(1) and 2 of the Convention, to the detriment of their next of kin. Lastly, they asked that the Court order the State to adopt diverse measures of reparation and for reimbursement of certain costs and expenses. 8. Answering brief. On August 7, 2018, the State submitted to the Court its brief answering the Commission’s submission of the case, and with observations on the pleadings and motions brief (hereinafter “answering brief”)3 and the annexes. In this brief, the State contested the alleged violations and submitted a preliminary objection of res judicata. In a communication of the Secretariat dated February 13, 2018, and on the instructions of the President of the Court, the General Coordinator of AIDEF was asked that, based on article 2 of the Memorandum of Understanding between the Court and the Association, he appoint, within 10 days, the defender who would assume the legal representation in this case and advise where the pertinent communications should be notified. 3 On April 10, 2018, the State appointed Jorge Luis Borrayo Reyes, President of COPREDEH, and Felipe Sánchez González, Executive Director of COPREDEH, as its Agents for this case. 2