4 Registry also requested the parties to provide certain information and documentation to be considered as evidence to facilitate the adjudication of the case. Said evidence has only been submitted by the representatives. Finally, in June 2007, the Commission, the representatives and the State submitted their briefs containing their final arguments, in which they provided some clarifications regarding the partial acknowledgement of liability made by the State, the alleged violations of the Convention and the possible reparations and costs. IV PARTIAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RESPONSIBILITY 8. At the beginning of the public hearing held in the instant case (supra para. 7), the Agent of the State partially acknowledged the responsibility of Ecuador in the following terms: […] the State of Ecuador expresses its good faith and its intention to respect and guarantee human rights. It reaffirms its special interest to contribute to the development of legal precedents which broaden the protection standard set forth in the American Convention [on] Human Rights. This is the position and the vision [the State] holds and maintains at this moment in time and for these circumstances, with the intention to modify the traditional conception of an oppressive State during regimes of exceptions, which tend according to us to be a favorable setting for eventual disproportionate use of force and abuses of authority. We believe that the maintenance of law and order cannot in any way be opposed to or given preference over the enjoyment of the fundamental rights in the Ecuadorian society and in human communities in general. In this context […] I present in the name of the State of Ecuador a partial aknowledgement of international liability arising from the violations of Articles 8, 25 and 27 of the American Convention on Human Rights. I make an exception [with respect to] Article 4 thereof, as we consider […] that the State of Ecuador has not incur in an unlawful protection of the right to life. We believe that the case herein discussed […] is a case which is still under judicial scrutiny and that although we found ourselves with a relative lack of promptness in the investigation within the area of the Ecuadorian judiciary, no responsibilities have nevertheless been clearly established. For this reason we exclude Article 4 of the Convention. 9. The State reiterated these statements in its final written arguments. 10. On this matter the Commission stated that “[this acknowledgement] being [made,] the matter and evidences remain limited to Article 4; [that] it [does] not [have] any objection to raise; [and that] it accepts this acknowledgement of liability understanding that it is partial and total: partial in the sense that it involves almost all the Articles invoked and alleged by the Commission, but total in the sense that none of those acknowledgements is conditional”. In its final written arguments, the Commission expressed that it “views favorably the partial acknowledgement of liability made by the State” and that this acknowledgement allow “to conclude that the controversy over the inappropriate use of the suspension of guarantees’ power during the state of emergency decreed on September 3, 1992, as well as over the lack of clarification of the facts and the failure to conduct a complete, impartial and effective investigation has been settled”. Furthermore, […] the Commission stresses “the significance of the said statement and considers that it constitutes a positive step toward the vindication of the victims’ memory and dignity and the mitigation of the damages inflicted to their family members and that it contributes to the efforts aimed at avoiding the repetition of similar situations”. Finally, the Commission noted “that the acknowledgement does not include the state responsibility for the violation of the right to life to the detriment of the [alleged] victims, the failure to comply with its obligation to respect rights and the duty to adopt domestic measures, nor does it refers to the reparations due to their family members”. 11. The representative expressed that “they accept[ed] the partial acknowledgement of liability made by the State and they request[ed the Court] to take [it] into consideration […] and [to give] it [its] due legal force during the proceedings of [this] hearing and of the instant case”. In its final