10. Public hearing. In an order of February 14, 2019,8 the President called the State, the representatives and the Inter-American Commission to a public hearing to receive their final oral arguments and observations on the preliminary objection and possible merits, reparations and costs, and also to receive the statements of one deponent and one witness proposed by the representatives and the opinions of three expert witnesses propose by the representatives and by the Commission. The public hearing took place on March 5 and 6, 2019, during the 130th regular session of the Court held at its seat.9 11. Amicus curiae. On March 22, 2019, the Court received an amicus curiae brief submitted by the Human Rights Clinic of the Law Faculty at the Universidad de Santa Clara.10 12. Final written arguments and observations. On April 5, 2019, the representatives and the State forwarded their respective final written arguments, together with several annexes, and the Commission presented its final written observations. 13. Deliberation of the case. The Court began deliberating on this judgment on October 9, 2019. III JURISDICTION 14. The Court has jurisdiction to hear this case, pursuant to Article 62(3) of the Convention, because Guatemala has been a State Party to the American Convention since May 25, 1978, and accepted the contentious jurisdiction of the Court on March 9, 1987. IV PRELIMINARY OBJECTION A. Arguments of the parties and of the Commission 15. The State argued that the circumstances described in this case were in conformity with domestic laws in force at the time of the events. It added that the criminal proceedings against Mr. Ruiz Fuentes constituted res judicata, because the representatives of the alleged victim had exhausted all the remedies under domestic law in force at the time of the events, which had been heard and decided promptly by the corresponding judicial organs. It also indicated that it had never executed the death penalty imposed on Mr. Ruiz Fuentes, because this had been commuted to the maximum term of imprisonment. 16. The Commission considered that the State’s position did not constitute a preliminary objection but, fundamentally, related to an issue corresponding to the merits of the matter. 17. The representatives endorsed the Commission’s opinion. Cf. Case of Ruiz Fuentes v. Guatemala. Call to a hearing. Order of the President of the Inter-American Court of February 14, 2017. Available at: http://www.corteidh.or.cr/docs/asuntos/ruiz_fuentes_14_02_19.pdf 9 There appeared at this hearing: (a) for the Inter-American Commission: Commissioner Luis Ernesto Vargas Ilva and legal adviser Silvia Serrano Guzmán; (b) for the representatives of the presumed victims: for the Instituto de Estudios Comparados en Ciencias Penales de Guatemala (ICCPG), Alejandro Rodríguez, and for the Center for Justice and International Law (CEJIL), Marcela Martino, Gisela de León, Paola Limón, Luisa Gómez and Camila Ormar, and (c) for the State of Guatemala: the President of COPREDEH Jorge Luis Borrayo Reyes, the Executive Director of COPREDEH, Felipe Sánchez González, the Director of Public Defenders, Carla Gabriela Morales, the legal advisers of the Directorate for Monitoring International Cases, Steffany Rebeca Vásquez and Rafael Eduardo Bran and the prosecutor from the Public Prosecution Service, Carlos Alberto de León Moreno. 10 The brief, signed by Francisco J. Rivera Juaristi, as Director of the Clinic, related to the death row phenomenon and the right to personal integrity. 8 6