total amount remaining was 116,063 pesos, which was paid with Consolidated Bonds in National Currency Fourth Series 2%, set to be redeemed for their full value in 2016. He argues that he could not wait until 2016 to redeem the bonds for their full value; because of the economic situation he faced, the debts associated with Sebastian’s recovery and care, and the fact that he was supposed to pay his share of attorneys’ fees. Thus, he argues that he redeemed the bonds in 2003 at a much lower value than their nominal value at maturity. According to the petitioner’s calculations, this meant that the bonds were redeemed at only 33% of their nominal value and that of the 116,063 pesos awarded in bonds, he received only 35,000 Argentine pesos (approximately US$ 11,000). Consequently, the petitioner contends that the damages amount that was awarded in his son’s case has been inadequate to cover Sebastian’s expenses, particularly taking into account the permanent physical and psychological effects of the accident on him and his consequent inability to hold a regular job. 14. Additionally, the petitioner attaches press clippings about amounts awarded in other civil damages cases in which the State was ordered to pay for situations that the petitioner deems less serious than that of his son’s, thereby arguing that these awards have comparatively been much higher than the judicial award given to his son. The petitioner further claims “in my son’s case the judgment and execution thereof should have been even more urgent, being that Sebastian (thank God) is alive and ever since the first day of his accident he has needed and will need financial aid at least for the rest of his life, for it to be as decent as possible (in fact he could have achieved a greater and better recovery, if we had received a quick economic response 14 years ago, without so much economic pressure, our family relationship would have been different).” 15. The petitioner contends that the State violated human rights in this case and bears responsibility, not only for negligence with regard to the abandoned military facilities that caused the accident, but also for the excessive delay in the judicial proceedings and in the execution of judgment, which deprived Sebastian of the necessary means for an adequate recovery. The petitioner specifically alleges that the State took an undue amount of time to acknowledge ownership of the military facilities where his son had the accident. According to the petitioner, the assistance and treatment required by Sebastian for his physical and mental rehabilitation as a result of the complexity and gravity of the case should have been urgent, it should have included the immediate family members and the State should have contributed with funds and institutions. In his own words, the petitioner contends that “after the almost 15 years that the State has taken to give us a miserable, humiliating and shameful compensation, as I see it, nothing could be done, what treatment could be given after 15 years? What can be recovered after 15 years?” 16. He claims that the accident caused irreversible brain damage to Sebastian at 14 years of age, changing his life forever. He notes that prior to the accident, Sebastian was a good student and was good at sports, but because of the accident, he had to learn to walk again and that he suffers from cognitive disability preventing him from effectively studying or holding a regular job. In his arguments regarding the evidence introduced in the context of the domestic court proceedings, the petitioner alleges that “proof has been given of the plaintiff’s significant and irreversible injuries and disability, as well as that prior to the accident he was a boy who took part (as any other child did) in all school activities such as sports, and that after the accident he could not take part in them as he did before.” As for his activities, he asserts: “before the accident the plaintiff studied and practiced sports (…) and that after the accident he could not do so at all.” As to the injuries and psychological and physical damage, he alleges that Sebastian has (i) a 40% degree of psychological disability and requires psychological treatment; and (ii) a 70% degree of irreversible physical disability and needs to undergo physio-kinesiologic therapy. 17. The petitioner files several medical reports to confirm Sebastian’s psychological status, describing it as a situation of cerebral involution associated with injuries, which occurred during the accident. As explained in the petitioner’s own words, his son “has chronic distraction