I INTRODUCTION OF THE CASE AND PURPOSE OF THE DISPUTE 1. The case submitted to the Court. On November 14, 2018, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the Inter-American Commission” or “the Commission”) submitted to the jurisdiction of the Court the case of Carlos Alberto Fernández Prieto and Carlos Alejandro Tumbeiro with regard to the Argentine Republic (hereinafter “the State,” “the State of Argentina,” “the Argentine State” or “Argentina”). The Commission indicated that the case related to the illegal and arbitrary detention of Carlos Alberto Fernández Prieto (hereinafter also “Mr. Fernández Prieto”) by agents of the Police Force of the Province of Buenos Aires in May 1992, and of Carlos Alejandro Tumbeiro (hereinafter also “Mr. Tumbeiro”) by agents of the Argentine Federal Police in January 1998. The Commission considered that both detentions were carried out without a court order or a situation of flagrante delicto, and indicated that, in neither case were the objective elements that would have resulted in a reasonable level of suspicion that an offense had been committed detailed in the respective official documentation. Moreover, in the case of Mr. Tumbeiro, it indicated that the explanation, which related to his “nervousness” and the “inconsistency” between his attire and the neighborhood where he was, could reveal a certain discrimination based on appearance and the prejudices about that appearance in relation to the respective neighborhood. The Commission also indicated that the detentions and searches in this case failed to meet the standards of legality and non-arbitrariness. In addition, it underlined that the judicial authorities had not provided effective remedies for this situation, because they not only persisted with the State’s failure to require objective reasons for the exercise of the legal authority to detain individuals based on suspicion, but also validated, as lawful, the reasons given by the police officers. 2. Procedure before the Commission. The procedure before the Commission was as follows: a) Petition. On July 30, 1999, and March 31, 2003, the National Public Defense Service lodged the respective initial petitions, which were combined because they related to similar facts. b) Admissibility Report. On March 19, 2012, the Commission adopted the Admissibility Report in which it found that the petitions were admissible.1 c) Merits Report. On October 25, 2017, the Commission adopted Merits Report No. 129/17 in which it reached a series of conclusions 2 and made several recommendations to the State. 3. Notification to the State. The Merits Report was notified to the State on December 13, 2017, granting it two months to report on compliance with the recommendations. The Commission awarded the State three extensions to provide the requested information. Argentina advised that it had held a meeting with the petitioners in April 2018 in order to reach agreement on implementation of the recommendations. However, the petitioners reported that, in June 2018, they had submitted a proposal for compliance with the The Commission declared the case admissible with regard to the rights established in Articles 7, 8 and 25 of the American Convention, in relation to Articles 1(1) and 2 of this instrument, to the detriment of Carlos Alberto Fernández Prieto and Carlos Alejandro Tumbeiro, and declared it inadmissible with regard to the right established in Article 11, in relation to Article 1(1) of that instrument. 1 The Commission concluded that the State was responsible for the violation of the rights established in Articles 7(1), 7(2), 7(3), 7(5), 8(1), 11(2) and 25(1) of the American Convention in relation to Articles 1(1) and 2 of this instrument, to the detriment of Carlos Alberto Fernández Prieto and Carlos Alejandro Tumbeiro. 2 3