25 circumstances of the case, it proceeds to define the various violations to the rights enshrined in the alleged articles. 72. The Courts considers it relevant to admit the acknowledgment of international liability made by the State for the violation of the rights enshrined in Articles 4 (Right to Life) and 5 (Right to Personal Integrity) of the American Convention, as regards to Article 1(1) (Obligation to Respect Rights) thereof, to the prejudice of Mr. Damião Ximenes-Lopes. 73. The Court notes that the State has not challenged the facts set forth in the complaint regarding its duty to conduct an investigation of the facts alleged regarding the death of Mr. Damião Ximenes-Lopes, and to identify and punish those responsible for his death; instead, it has challenged their classification, whereby the State considers that it is not liable for the alleged violation of the rights enshrined in Articles 8 (Right to a Fair Trial) and 25 (Right to Judicial Protection) of the American Convention, regarding Article 1(1) (Obligation to Respect Rights) thereof, to the prejudice of Mr. Ximenes-Lopes´next of kin, alleged by the Commission and the representatives. 3. Regarding to the claims for reparation 74. The Court considers that the State has not acquiesced to any of the claims for reparation and legal costs made by the Commission and the representatives. 4. 75. Extension of the subsistent dispute Article 38(2) of the Rules of Procedure provide that [I]n its answer, the respondent must state whether it accepts the facts and claims or whether it contradicts them, and the Court may consider accepted those facts that have not been expressly denied and the claims that have not been expressly contested. 76. At the above mentioned public hearing the State expressly stated that it does not acknowledge its international liability for the alleged violation of Articles 8 (Right to a Fair Trial) and 25 (Right to Judicial Protection) of the American Convention, to the prejudice of Mr. Damião Ximenes-Lopes´next of kin. In its closing written arguments, the State pointed out that it has neither violated the right to a fair trial nor the right to judicial protection, since it has complied with the principles of the due process of law, adversarial proceedings, and broad defense. According to the State, its commitment to justice was evidenced by the processing of the case in the domestic jurisdiction, as well as by the arguments submitted before the Court in the response to the petition, wherein a historical description was made of all measures adopted by the State for the purpose of finding the facts regarding the death of Mr. Damião Ximenes-Lopes and punish those responsible for the mistreatment and death suffered by said patient at the Casa de Reposo de Guararapes (Guararapes Rest Home). 77. Upon submitting its closing oral arguments at the above mentioned public hearing, the Commission stated that it reiterated the request made in the complaint filed before the Court that the State be condemned for the violation of Articles 8 and 25 of the Convention, regarding Article 1(1) thereof, since the State has not complied with the duties arising therefrom. Likewise, in its closing written arguments the Commission stated that all that has been done regarding the police investigation