8 IV. ANALYSIS OF THE MERITS A. Facts established 38. In application of Article 43(1) of its Rules of Procedure, the Commission will examine the arguments and evidence offered by the parties and the information obtained at the hearing held during the Commission’s 133rd regular session and from the amicus curiae briefs presented. It will also consider information that is in the public domain. 12 39. On April 7, 1995, Hermes Navarro del Valle, a Costa Rican citizen, filed a case challenging the constitutionality of Executive Decree No. 24029-S, issued on February 3, 1995, which regulated in vitro fertilization in Costa Rica. The petitioner alleged that the in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer technique regulated in that decree violated the right to life and the right to have one’s dignity respected. 40. The Executive Decree in question authorized the technique of in vitro fertilization between married couples and established rules to govern its practice. In Article 1, the Executive Decree established the practice of assisted reproductive techniques between married couples and set forth rules for their practice. 13 Article 2 defined assisted reproductive techniques as “all those artificial techniques in which the egg and the sperm are united through a form of direct manipulation of the reproductive cells in the laboratory.” 41. Those provisions of Decree Law No. 24029-S that specifically concern the technique of in vitro fertilization 14 at issue in the constitutionality challenge were as follows: 15 Article 9.- In cases of in vitro fertilization, fertilization of more than six of the patient’s ova per treatment cycle is strictly prohibited. Article 10.- All ova fertilized in a treatment cycle shall be transferred to the patient’s uterine cavity; disposing of or destroying fertilized ova or preserving them to be transferred into the same patient in later cycles or into other patients, is strictly prohibited. Article 11.- Manipulation of the embryo’s genetic code, or any other experimentation on the embryo, is strictly prohibited. Article 12.- Marketing either homologous or heterologous reproductive cells –eggs and sperms- to be used in treating patients by means of assisted reproductive techniques, is strictly prohibited. Article 13.- Failure to comply with the provisions herein established shall give the Ministry of Health the authority to cancel the health services operating permit and the accreditation of the establishment in which the violation was committed; the matter is to be immediately referred to the Public Prosecutor’s Office and to the respective Professional Association, for the necessary sanctions to be administered. 12 Article 43(1) of the Commission’s Rules of Procedure: “The Commission shall deliberate on the merits of the case, to which end it shall prepare a report in which it will examine the arguments, the evidence presented by the parties, and the information obtained during hearings and on-site observations. In addition, the Commission may take into account other information that is a matter of public knowledge.” 13 Judgment No. 2000-02306 of March 15, 2000, issued by the Constitutional Chamber of Costa Rica’s Supreme Court, Case File No. 95-001734-007-CO. 14 The Commission understands that the Spanish expression “fertilización in vitro” in this decree is the same as the expression “fecundación in vitro,” as defined later in this report. 15 Judgment No. 2000-02306 of March 15, 2000, issued by the Constitutional Chamber of the Costa Rican Supreme Court, Case File No. 95-001734-007-CO.