B. Position of the State 27. In the merits stage the Ecuadorian State reiterated some of the arguments related to admissibility, specifically those related to exhaustion of domestic remedies and duplicity. Since these allegations were duly analyzed in the Admissibility Report, the Commission will refer to the State’s arguments that deal with the merits of the case. 28. As background information, the State pointed out that the events of this case took place during a special period of the history of the rule of law in Ecuador, during the 1990s decade, when socioeconomic reforms and structural adjustments were being implemented and which also resulted in changes in the administration of justice. 29. The State sustained that there was no systematic pattern of forced disappearances implemented by State agents. It also stated that a Truth Commission was created on May 3, 2007 to investigate cases linked with human rights violations during the period 1984-1988 as well as other periods. 30. The State argued that the case under analysis is factual and legally complex. It noted that even though the petitioners claim that State agents took part in the events, there is no evidence that proves this. 31. The State referred to the petitioners’ allegations indicating that the State covered up those responsible for the alleged human rights violation, and sustains that they are trying to force the IACHR to assume the criminal jurisdictional prerogatives of the State to investigate and sanction. Ecuador alleged that the establishing of criminal responsibilities corresponds to domestic judges and tribunals and that the organs of the Inter-American System only have a reinforcing or complementary role. 32. The State contended the statement made by the petitioners about the National Police declining to initially take on the complaint for 48 hours had not passed since the events. It sustained that on one hand, there is no evidence to support such allegations, and on the other hand, there is evidence that a complaint was lodged on November 16, 1990 six days after the events, and that the State undertook immediate steps to start the search of the alleged victim. 33. The State pointed out that there is a conflict of interest with regards to Elsie Monge, who acted as former President of the Truth Commission and as petitioner in the instant case. It argues that her role as President of the Truth Commission grants her a disloyal advantage for she intervened actively and decisively in the definition of the facts of this matter. Ecuador sustains that this situation incurs a breach of the State’s right to defense. 34. The State argued that it did not breach the Right to Juridical Personality, as it always recognized Mr. César Gustavo Garzón as a rights-bearer as well as the ability of his next of kin to take action. Ecuador added that once the complaint was submitted before the National Police, the General Command of the Police ordered a search. Ecuador stated that the Truth Commission’s undertakings resulted in the launching of an inquiry of the disappearance of the alleged victim, carried out by the State’s General Prosecutor. 35. Ecuador also alleged that it did not breach the Rights to Life and Personal Liberty, because in the absence of evidence that determines the participation of State agents, the events described do not constitute the crime of forced disappearance, and even less of extrajudicial execution. In addition, it argued that the alleged victim was once detained and an investigation was carried out in accordance to the legal procedures of the time, so a new detention would not be necessary. 36. The State rejected a breach of the Right of Humane Treatment as it asserted that recognizing such violations to the detriment of the next of kin of a person who has disappeared, first requires determining the existence of a forced disappearance, and the State responsibility, which the State maintains are absent in the instant case. 37. Ecuador alleged that it did not breach the Rights to a Fair Trial and Judicial Protection because the complaint lodged on November16, 1990 triggered investigations and a search by the competent authorities. 4