12 ACQUIESCENCE 37. In the public hearing of November 10, 1999, Venezuela acknowledged the facts described by the Commission in Section III of the application, which are summarized in paragraph 2 of this judgment. Venezuela also accepted the legal consequences that derive from the facts mentioned (supra, paragraph 2) and fully acknowledged its international responsibility in the instant case. During this hearing, the State presented 79 documents with information relating to the case. 38. Article 52.2 of the Rules of Procedure provides that [i]f the respondent informs the Court of its acquiescence in the claims of the party that has brought the case, the Court shall decide, after hearing the opinions of the latter and the representatives of the victims or their next of kin, whether such acquiescence and its juridical effects are acceptable. In that event, the Court shall determine the appropriate reparations and indemnities. 39. During the public hearing, the State’s Agent declared [...] that the State of Venezuela failed to comply with the American Convention as regards the protection of human rights and, as the Supreme Court [of Justice of Venezuela] itself has stated, there was an abnormal delay and an unjustifiable denial of justice in determining the circumstances, the facts, the persons who died and those responsible. [... that] it offer[ed] to deliver to the Court the judgments of the Supreme Court which clearly illustrated the State’s willingness to comply with the Commission’s recommendations in the report that it had issued in this case and, to this end, to make all the reparations that not only international legislation but also the Convention and domestic legislation [require]. To this end, the Supreme Court has taken over the hearing of all the cases, both those that are before the ordinary criminal jurisdiction and those that are before military justice. It has separated the files according to the name of the victims and has been pronouncing a series of decisions ordering the reinitiation of all activities aimed at clarifying the facts and punishing the guilty parties. Moreover, the Supreme Court has gone further and has ordered the Judiciary Council and the Ministry of Defense to open the necessary proceedings to establish the responsibility of the judges and prosecutors of the Office of the Attorney-General, who are responsible for the abnormal delay mentioned by the Supreme Court of Justice. [...] that as a consequence of its non-compliance with the Convention, [the] State acknowledges the right of the victims’ next of kin to receive fair compensation for the damages caused and, in consequence, it only [...] remains to request the Court to open the proceeding and order [...] reparations and compensation in accordance with its own jurisprudence, and in each case, according to the responsibility that the State shall determine. Lastly, it added that “[t]he State has decided not to contest the facts and, accordingly, acknowledges their consequences, which are reparation and compensation”. 40. Accordingly, the Delegate of the Inter-American Commission stated that, in the Commission’s opinion, the State’s declarations are the acknowledgement of the facts and the claim that the Commission has set forth in the application [...] and the acknowledgement of the State’s responsibility.