4
11.
On December 8, 2004, the Commission sent the Admissibility and Merits
Report to the State granting the latter two months to provide information on the
measures adopted to comply with its recommendations. On the same date, in
accordance with Article 43(3) of its Rules of Procedure, the Commission notified the
petitioners that it had adopted the report and that it had been forwarded to the
State, and inquired about their position with regard to the eventual submission of the
case to the Inter-American Court. On February 8, 2005, the State requested an
extension to provide information on the measures adopted to comply with the
Commission’s recommendations. The extension was granted until February 23, 2005,
and Paraguay presented a report on February 24, that year. On March 4, 2005, the
State requested a three-month extension of the time limit established in Article
51(1) of the Convention, “accepting expressly and irrevocably that the granting of
this extension suspend[ed the said] time limit […] for the submission of the case to
the Inter-American Court and manifesting that the State expressly waived filing the
objection concerning the suspension of [that] time limit.” This extension was granted
by the Commission as of that day and until June 4, 2005, so that “the State [would
have] additional time to comply with the recommendations made by the Commission
in its Report No. 75/04.”
12.
On June 7, 2005, having heard the opinion of the petitioners, the InterAmerican Commission decided to submit this case to the Court’s jurisdiction, “based
on the State’s failure to comply with the recommendations” contained in Report No.
75/04.
IV
PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COURT
13.
On June 8, 2005, the Inter-American Commission lodged the application
before the Court (supra para. 1), attaching documentary evidence and offering
testimonial and expert evidence. The Commission appointed José Zalaquett,
Commissioner, and Santiago A. Canton, Executive Secretary, as delegates, and
Víctor Madrigal Borloz, Ignacio Álvarez and Manuela Cuvi Rodríguez as legal advisers.
14.
On August 22, 2005, after the President of the Court (hereinafter “the
President”) had made a preliminary review of the application, the Secretariat of the
Court (hereinafter “the Secretariat”) notified it, together with the attachments, to the
State informing the latter of the time limits for answering the application and
appointing its representatives in the proceedings. On the same date, the Secretariat
advised the State that, pursuant to the provisions of Articles 18 of the Court’s Rules
of Procedure and 10 of its Statute, it had the right to appoint a judge ad hoc to take
part in the consideration of the case within 30 days of notification of the application.
The State did not make this appointment.
15.
On August 22, 2005, also, the Secretariat, in accordance with the provisions
of Article 35(1)(d) and (e) of the Rules of Procedure, notified the application to the
representatives, Global Rights and CIPAE, and advised them that they had two
months to present their brief with requests, arguments and evidence (hereinafter
“requests and arguments brief”). The representatives did not submit this brief.
16.
On September 21, 2005, the State appointed Oscar Martínez as Agent and
Francisco Bareiro as Deputy Agent in the case. On December 6, that year, the State
appointed Jorge Bogarin González as Agent, replacing Oscar Martínez.
Select target paragraph3
Connect to a paragraph
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
Add to table of contents