3. Requests of the Inter-American Commission. – Based on the foregoing, the Commission requested the Court to declare the international responsibility of the State for the same violations indicated in its Report on the Merits (supra para. 1). Furthermore, the Commission requested the Court to order the State to provide certain reparation measures, which are detailed and analyzed in chapter IX of this judgment II PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COURT 4. Notification to the representatives and to the State. – The submission of the case was notified by the Court to the alleged victim’s representative 4 (hereinafter “the representative”) and to the State on November 21, 2017. 5. Brief containing pleadings, motions and evidence. – On January 27, 2018, the alleged victim’s representative submitted to the Court the brief containing pleadings, motions and evidence (hereinafter “the brief containing pleadings, motions and evidence”). The representative substantially agreed with the Commission’s claims and requested the Court to declare the international responsibility of the State for the violation of the same articles claimed by the Commission, as well as the violation of Article 9 of the Convention, 5 to the detriment of Jorge Enrique Rosadio Villavicencio. Furthermore, the alleged victim, through his representative, applied for the Victims’ Legal Assistance Fund of the Inter-American Court (hereinafter “the Legal Assistance Fund”). Lastly, it asked the Court to order the State to adopt reparation measures and to reimburse certain legal expenses and costs. 6. Answering brief. – On June 28, 2018, the State submitted to the Court its answering brief to the submission of the Report on the Merits by the Inter-American Commission and the representative’s brief containing pleadings, motions and evidence (hereinafter “the answering brief”).6 7. Victims’ Legal Assistance Fund. – The order of the President of the Court dated September 17, 2018, accepted the request filed by the alleged victim to avail himself of the Court’s Legal Assistance Fund.7 8. Observations on the preliminary objections. – On September 12 and 13, 2018, the Commission and the representative submitted, respectively, their observations on the preliminary objections filed by the State and requested that the objections be dismissed. The representative submitted annexes along with the brief of September 13, 2018. On September 28, 2018, the State submitted its observations to the annexes and on October 4, 2018, the Commission indicated that it did not have any observations. On October 18, 2018, the victim’s representative submitted a “justification for [its] presentation of annexes, on which the State of Peru submitted observations […],” along with additional annexes. The attorney César Villacorta Spinner acted as the victim’s representative in this case. In the Admissibility Report in the instant case, the Commission indicated that “the petitioner did not specify the alleged violation of Article 9 of the Convention; therefore, it is not applicable to admit this violation since in the context of the petition there are no facts that characterize it as such.” However, in the same report it decided “to [d]eclare admissible the allegations contained in the instant case regarding the alleged violation of Articles 1(1) 7, 8 and 9 of the American Convention to the detriment of Jorge Rosadio Villavicencio by the State of Peru.” On March 12, 2018, the alleged victim’s representative submitted “additional information” regarding the case that will not be taken into consideration since it is time-barred. 6 In the communication of December 28, 2017, the State appointed Iván Arturo Bazán Chacón as Agent, and Luis Alberto Huerta Guerrero, Sergio Manuel Tamayo Yáñez and Helmut Andrés Olivera Torres as Deputy Agents. 7 Cf. Case of Rosadio Villavicencio v. Peru. Victims’ Legal Assistance Fund. Order of the President of the InterAmerican Court of September 17, 2018. Available at: http://www.corteidh.or.cr/docs/asuntos/villavicencio_fv_18.pdf. 4 5 5