(iii) “Make adequate reparations to the [presumed] victims for the pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage caused by the violations declared in the […] report”; (iv) “Adapt the Counter-Terrorism Act embodied in Law 18,314, so that it is compatible with the principle of legality recognized in Article 9 of the American Convention”; (v) “Adapt the domestic laws governing criminal procedure so that they are compatible with the rights recognized in Article 8(2)(f) and 8(2)(h) of the American Convention,” and (vi) “Adopt measures of non-repetition to eradicate the discriminatory prejudices based on ethnic origin in the exercise of public power and, especially, in the administration of justice.” d) Notification of the State. On December 7, 2010, the Commission notified the Merits Report to the State and asked it to provide information on compliance with the recommendations within two months. At the request of Chile, this time frame was extended one month until April 1, 2011. On that date, the State presented a report on the measures taken to comply with some of the recommendations made in the Merits Report and contested some of the report’s conclusions. On April 7, 2011, Chile asked for another extension, and this was granted by the Commission for four months. On July 7, 2011, the State submitted a report and on August 5, 2011, it presented “another report, which, in substance, repeated its report of July 7, 2011.” e) Submission to the Court. On August 7, 2011, the Commission submitted all the facts and human rights violations described in the Merits Report to the jurisdiction of the InterAmerican Court because of “the need to obtain justice for the [presumed] victims owing to non-compliance with the recommendations by the Chilean State.” The Commission appointed Commissioner Dinah Shelton and then Executive Secretary Santiago A. Canton as its delegates, and Elizabeth Abi-Mershed, Deputy Executive Secretary, Silvia Serrano Guzmán, María Claudia Pulido and Federico Guzmán Duque, lawyers of the Executive Secretariat, as legal advisers. The Commission provided the names of the representatives of the eight presumed victims together with the respective powers of attorney and contact information.8 3. Request of the Inter-American Commission. Based on the above, the Inter-American Commission asked the Court to declare the international responsibility of Chile for the violations indicated in the above-mentioned conclusions of its Merits Report (supra para. 2). It also asked the Court to order the State to implement specific measures of reparation. II – PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COURT 4. Designation of two common interveners of the representatives of the presumed victims. The representatives of the eight presumed victims failed to reach an agreement on the designation of one common intervener. The Court therefore authorized the designation of more than one common intervener in application of Article 25(2) of its Rules of Procedure. The representatives advised that the Center for Justice and International Law (hereinafter “CEJIL”) and the International Federation for Human Rights (hereinafter “the FIDH”) would act as common interveners representing all the presumed victims.9 8 (1) “Jaime Madariaga De la Barra and Ylenia Hartog, representing Segundo Aniceto Norín Catrimán and Pascual Huentequeo Pichún Paillalao”; (2) “José Aylwin Oyarzún, Sergio Fuenzalida and the Center for Justice and International Law (CEJIL), representing Víctor Manuel Ancalaf Llaupe,” and (3) “[the] International Federation for Human Rights and Alberto Espinoza Pino, representing Florencio Jaime Marileo Saravia, José Huenchunao Mariñán, Juan Patricio Marileo Saravia, Juan Ciriaco Millacheo Licán and Patricia Roxana Troncoso Robles.” Cf. Brief submitting the case to the Inter-American Court. 9 They also forwarded copies of powers of attorney granted by presumed victims Pascual Huentequeo Pichún Paillalao and Segundo Aniceto Norín Catrimán to the FIDH. 6