22. Furthermore, Article 35(1) of the Court’s Rules of Procedure establishes that alleged victims must be identified in the Merits Report, pursuant to Article 50 of the American Convention. It is therefore incumbent upon the Commission to identify precisely, and at the proper procedural opportunity, the alleged victims in a case before the Court, except in the exceptional circumstances set forth in Article 35(2) of the Court’s Rules of Procedure, namely, when it has not been possible to identify one or more alleged victims in cases of massive or collective violations, the Court will decide in due course whether to consider them victims in accordance with the nature of the violation. 18 This means that Article 35(2) conditions the possibility of identifying new alleged victims in a contentious case, in addition to those already named by the Inter-American Commission, to i) the presence of mass or collective violations; ii) and that, for this reason, it has not been possible to identify one or more alleged victims of the facts of the case, and iii) that such failure to identify them is justifiable. 23. In the case under analysis, this Court finds that the six indigenous communities included in the aforementioned pleadings and motions brief (supra para. 20) were not identified as alleged victims in the Merits Report. On the contrary, the Commission expressly excluded the facts related to the community radio stations operated by the aforementioned six indigenous communities. Indeed, footnote 20 of the Commission’s Merits Report stated: In their brief of observations to the merits, dated December 20, 2018, the petitioners included a list of community radio stations that were allegedly raided, many of which are not part of the present case. The following are examples of raids carried out on community radio stations in Guatemala: 1) July 7, 2006, raid at Radio Ixchel, operated by the Maya Kaqchikel people of Sumpango, in Sacatepéquez; 2) 2008 raid on Radio San Pedro, of San Pedro in Sololá; 3) December 8, 2009 raid at Radio San Juan de Comalapa in Chimaltenango; 4) May 8, 2012, raid at Radio Uqul Tinamit de San Miguel Chicaj in Baja Verapaz; 5) October 11, 2012, raid at Radio Doble Vía, San Mateo de Quetzaltenango; 6) November 15, 2012, and November 21, 2013 raids at Radio Damasco de San Pablo, in San Marcos; 7) February, 27, 2014, raid at Radio San José de San Pedro, in San Marcos; 8) December 9, 2014, at Radio Juventud, in Patzicia, Chimaltenango; 9) January 20, 2015, raid at Radio Snuq’Jolom Konob, Santa Eulalia, in Huehuetenango; 10) February 25, 2015, raid at Radio Ixmukane, in Santa Cruz del Quiché, in Quiche; 11) February 25, 2015, raid at Radio Swan Tinamit, in Chichicastenango, and 12) September 16, 2015, raid at Radio Restauración, in Chimaltenango. At least six of these community radio stations do not currently broadcast their programs and six suspended their transmissions for a certain period of time and later returned to the air. In each of the 12 raids, the authorities seized broadcasting equipment and in at least four cases, some of the volunteers and/or employees were arrested. The petitioners requested precautionary measures for eight of these radio stations, which are not part of this case (Underlining added). 24. As stated in the above note, the Commission did not identify as alleged victims the indigenous communities that the representatives included in their pleadings and motions brief, nor did it include the facts concerning the alleged raids on their community radio stations in the Merits Report. Therefore, the Court considers that said communities are not alleged victims in this case, since none of the exceptions set forth in Article 35(2) of the Rules of the Court are present or were alleged. 25. At the same time, and taking into account that the State raised no objection in this regard, the Court deems it pertinent to point out that the representatives have not submitted of February 26, 2016. Series A No. 22, para. 75, and Case of the Indigenous Communities of the Lhaka Honhat (Our Land) Association v. Argentina. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of February 6, 2020. Series C No. 400, para. 154. 18 Cf. Case of the Río Negro Massacres v. Guatemala. Preliminary objection, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of September 4, 2012. Series C No. 250, para. 48; Case of the Indigenous Communities of the Lhaka Honhat (Our Land) Association v. Argentina. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of February 6, 2020. Series C No. 400, para. 31, and Case of Ríos Avalos et al. v. Paraguay. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of August 19, 2021. Series C No. 429, para. 15. -8-