2 17(2) and 24 of the American Convention, in relation to the obligations undertaken in articles 1(1) and 2 thereof, to the detriment of: Gretel Artavia Murillo, Miguel Mejía Carballo, Andrea Bianchi Bruno, German Alberto Moreno Valencia, Ana Cristina Castillo León, Enrique Acuña Cartín, Ileana Henchos Bolaños, Miguel Antonio Yamuni Zeledón, Claudia María Carro Maklouf, Víctor Hugo Sanabria León, Karen Espinoza Vindas, Héctor Jiménez Acuña, Maria del Socorro Calderón P., Joaquina Arroyo Fonseca, Geovanni Antonio Vega, Carlos E. Vargas Solórzano, Julieta González Ledezma and Oriester Rojas Carranza II. PROCESSING SUBSEQUENT TO ISSUANCE OF THE ADMISSIBILITY REPORT 6. In Report No. 25/04 of March 11, 2004, the Commission concluded that the petition was admissible with respect to articles 1, 2, 11, 17 and 24 of the American Convention. By note dated March 11, 2004, the Commission forwarded the report to the petitioner and to the State and gave the petitioner two months in which to submit additional observations on the merits. Pursuant to Article 48(1)(f) of the American Convention, the Commission placed itself at the disposal of the parties with a view to reaching a friendly settlement of the matter. 7. On May 12, 2004, the IACHR forwarded to the State the petitioner’s observations on the merits. The State was given two months in which to present its observations, which were received on September 1, 2004. 8. The IACHR also received information from the petitioner on the following dates: April 15 and 16, May 12 and October 1, 2004; June 19, 21, 28 and 30, July 5 and 6, and October 20, 2006; January 19, February 12, 26 and 27, 2007; March 31, April 1, August 8 and October 28, 2008; January 30, July 27, August 5 and 19, November 3 and December 18, 2009; and January 3 and February 16 and 17, 2010. Those communications were duly forwarded to the State. 9. The Commission received observations from the State on the following dates: July 19, 2004; February 11, 2005; October 17 and November 20, 2006; February 27 and May 17, 2007; October 17, 28 and 29 and November 24, 2008; January 30, April 22, May 26, June 3 and August 6, 2009; and January 8, 12 and 22, 2010. Those communications were promptly forwarded to the petitioner. 10. On October 28, 2008, during its 133rd regular session, the Commission held a public hearing attended by Andrea Bianchi Bruno (an alleged victim), who was present as a witness. Also in attendance were her representative and the State of Costa Rica. 11. During the proceedings on the case, three amicus curiae briefs were received in support of the arguments made by the petitioners. The Center for Reproductive Rights submitted an amicus brief on December 9, 2004. The Commission received a second amicus brief on September 26, 2005, this one filed by Yale Law School’s Allard K. Lowenstein International Human Rights Law Clinic. On October 6, 2009, the IACHR received an amicus curiae brief filed by the International Reproductive and Sexual Health Law Programme of the University of Toronto’s Faculty of Law. Two amicus curiae briefs were received in support of the State’s arguments. On February 28, 2005, the Commission received an amicus brief from Human Life international. On October 26, 2008, the Commission received an amicus curiae brief from the University of St. Thomas’ School of Law. All the amicus briefs were forwarded to the parties on December 3, 2009.