4 12. On August 14, 2003, the Commission ordered the joinder of the cases of Wilson García-Asto and Urcesino Ramírez-Rojas into case file No. 12.413. 13. On March 11, 2004, the Inter-American Commission approved Report on admissibility and merits No. 27/04. In said report, the Commission concluded that it had “jurisdiction to hear the instant case and that the petition [was] admissible.” Furthermore, it considered that the State should adopt the following recommendations: 1. According to the provisions of its domestic legislation, to adopt all such measures as may be necessary to redress in full the violations of the human rights of Wilson García-Asto and Urcesino Ramírez-Rojas as described in the […] report, in particular, to deliver a new judgment in full compliance with the rule of freedom from ex post facto laws, that cannot be in any way violated by discretionary and flexible judicial interpretations of criminal laws, and with due process and fair trial rules. 2. To adopt all such measures as may be necessary to amend Decree-Law No. 25.475 in order to bring its provisions in line with the American Convention on Human Rights. 14. On March 22, 2004, the Commission sent the report on admissibility and merits to the State, granting it a term of two months to inform about the measures adopted in compliance with the recommendations set forth therein. The State failed to submit an answer thereto. 15. On June 20, 2004, as a result of the State’s failure to comply with the recommendations included in the report approved under Article 50 of the Convention, the Commission decided to submit the case to the Court. IV PROCEEDING BEFORE THE COURT 16. On June 22, 2004, the Inter-American Commission filed an application before the Court (supra para. 1), attaching documentary evidence thereto, and offering to submit testimonies of witnesses and expert witnesses as further evidence. The Commission appointed Freddy Gutiérrez, Florentín Meléndez, and Santiago Canton as delegates, and Ariel Dulitzky, Pedro E. Díaz, Manuela Cuvi, and Lilly Ching as legal counsels. 17. On August 5, 2004, in compliance with Article 35(1)(e) of the Rules of Procedure, the Secretariat of the Court (hereinafter “the Secretariat”), after a preliminary examination of the application by the President of the Court (hereinafter “the President”), served said application and the appendixes thereto on the representatives of the alleged victims and their next of kin (hereinafter “the representatives”) and notified them of the term within which they were to submit a brief with their requests, arguments, and evidence (hereinafter “brief of requests and arguments”).