I INTRODUCTION OF THE CASE AND PURPOSE OF THE DISPUTE 1. The case submitted to the Court. On January 25, 2012, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the Inter-American Commission” or “the Commission���) submitted to the jurisdiction of the Court (hereinafter ”submission brief”) the case of “Melba del Carmen Suárez Peralta” against the Republic of Ecuador (hereinafter “the State” or “Ecuador”), indicating that: (a) in July 2000, Melba del Carmen Suárez Peralta was operated on for appendicitis in the Minchala private clinic, and this caused her severe and permanent ailments; (b) the criminal proceedings opened in relation to these facts concluded inconclusively, owing to the lack of due diligence in the execution of the proceedings, which resulted in the declaration of the statute of limitations in 2005, more than five years after the court order to investigate the offense had been issued; (c) no real investigation was conducted into the main person accused, or into those possibly implicated with different degrees of responsibility; (d) the criminal proceedings were characterized by a lack of procedural activity ex officio and by minimum guarantees of due diligence for the presumed victim; (e) the absence of a response and the delay in expediting and processing the proceedings gave those eventually responsible the benefit of impunity, and (f) the decision on the request to fine the administrator of justice who intervened in the proceedings was not motivated. 2. Proceedings before the Commission. The proceedings before the Commission were as follows: a) Petition. On February 23, 2006, Melba del Carmen Suárez Peralta and her representative, Jorge Sosa Meza, lodged the initial petition before the Commission; b) Admissibility Report. On October 30, 2008, the Commission approved Admissibility Report No. 85/08; 2 c) Merits Report. On July 20, 2011, the Commission approved Merits Report 75/11, 3 pursuant to Article 50 of the Convention (hereinafter also “the Merits Report” or “Report No. 75/11”), in which it reached a series of conclusions and made several recommendations to the State. a. Conclusions. – The Commission concluded that the State was responsible for violating the following rights recognized in the American Convention: i. “The right to a fair trial and to judicial protection, established in Articles 8(1) and 25(1) of the American Convention in relation to the general obligation to respect and ensure the rights established in Article 1(1) thereof, with respect to Melba del Carmen Suárez Peralta and her mother, Melba Peralta Mendoza.” b. Recommendations. The Commission therefore recommendations to the State; namely that it: made a series of 2 In this report, the Commission declared the petition admissible with regard to the presumed violation of Articles 5(1), 8(1) and 25(1) of the Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) of this instrument. Cf. Admissibility Report No. 85/08, Case 12,683, Melba del Carmen Suárez Peralta, Ecuador, October 30, 2008 (file of proceedings before the Commission, folios 432 to 444). In this regard, on February 26, 2009, the Commission forwarded to the parties a fe de errata with regard to Report No. 85/08, which excluded the mention of the admissibility of Article 5(1) of the Convention. 3 Merits Report No 75/11, Case 12,683, Melba del Carmen Suárez Peralta, Ecuador, July 20, 2011 (merits file, folios 8 to 38). 4