3 1. Provide adequate reparations for the human rights violations stated in [the merits] report in both material and moral terms, including implementation of an adequate program of psycho-social treatment for the survivors. 2. Conduct an investigation in the ordinary jurisdiction regarding the events related to the human rights violations reported in the merits report and conduct those investigations impartially and effectively, and within a reasonable period of time, in order to fully clarify the facts, identify the intellectual authors and perpetrators, and impose the appropriate penalties. 3. Take the respective administrative, disciplinary, or criminal measures against the actions or omissions of State agents who contributed to denying justice and fostering impunity with respect to the facts of this case. 4. Establish a mechanism to facilitate the comprehensive identification of the wounded victims as well as of the relatives of the executed victims. 5. Take the measures necessary to ensure that Article 3 of the Code of Justice of the Armed Forces is compatible with the American Convention and inter-American jurisprudence. 6. Adopt the measures necessary to prevent similar occurrences in future, consistent with the duty to prevent human rights violations and guarantee those rights as recognized in the American Convention. Implement, in particular, permanent human rights programs in the Armed Forces and National Police training schools, especially on the excessive use of force and on the principle of nondiscrimination. On the other hand, regarding the identification of the relatives who should be considered victims in the instant case, the Commission informs the Inter-American Court that, when report 174/10 was approved, it delimited the scope of victims, leaving open in the recommendations the State’s obligation to locate the remaining victims of the facts. After the approval of the report on the merits, the petitioners submitted to the Commission a list of persons they consider to belong to the group of survivors and relatives of the executed victims. Finally, the Commission requests the Honorable Court to transfer the appropriate parts of the expert witness report provided by anthropologist Samuel Martínez in the Yean and Bosico v. Dominican Republic Case to the present case, and additionally, the Commission offers the following expert declarations in relation to issues of the inter-American public interest in the instant case:  Expert to be defined, who will testify on the intervention of Dominican military justice in the investigation and adjudication of crimes that are not part of its function and/that could constitute human rights violations; as well as the constitutional and legal regulation of the scope of military justice in the Dominican Republic.  Expert to be defined, who will tesitfy on the treatment that Haitian migrants receive in Dominican territory, and regarding the minimum guarantees that in accordance with international human rights standards should govern any criminal or other proceeding involving the determination of a person’s migrant status or that could result in punishment as a result of said status.  Expert to be defined, who will testify on structural discrimination in the Dominican Republic against Haitians or those of Haitian origin, the excessive use of force by agents of the State against Haitians or those of Haitian origin, as well as the absence of effective responses by the judicial branch in addressing these problems. The curricula vitae of the experts proposed by the Inter-American Commission are attached. Finally, the petitioners expressed the victims’ interest in the submission of the present case to the Inter-American Court and informed that the following shall be representatives of the victims: the Grupo de