9 14. In a note of October 12, 1998, Venezuela requested a hearing before the Commission, which was not granted because the Commission had already adopted a decision in the case. 15. In a note of February 12, 1999, the State requested “an extension of sixty more days to the two months granted by the Commission in order to inform the new Government of the report issued by the Commission and, consequently, to ascertain its instructions for complying with the recommendations that the Commission had formulate[d] to the State in its report”. In a note of February 23, 1999, the Commission acknowledged receipt of this request and stated that it would consider the request for an extension, as long as the State agreed to interrupt the period established in Article 51.1 of the Convention. 16. On February 24, 1999, Venezuela expressed its agreement with the terms proposed by the Commission and indicated that it accepted that as of “March 7, 1999, the period established in Article 51.1 of the Convention [should be] interrupted, and that the extension of two months requested by the State of Venezuela in order to comply with the recommendations in the Commission’s report [should be] calculated from that date”. Accordingly, in a note of March 2, 1999, the Commission informed the State that the two additional months would expire on May 7, 1999, and that the period established in Article 51.1 of the Convention would expire on June 7, 1999. 17. In a note of March 9, 1999, the President of Venezuela, Hugo Chávez Frías, addressed the Chairman of the Commission and mentioned, inter alia, that “he [had] instructed the State’s Agent [...] to negotiate the best terms possible, so that, with the participation of the Commission, an honorable, full and satisfactory solution could be reached with the next of kin of the victims who had suffered the excesses of any police official or the State security forces”. 18. In a note of March 24, 1999, the Commission acknowledged receipt of the above-mentioned note and advised that “it [would] proceed to forward the position of the illustrious Government of Venezuela to the petitioners in case 11,455, in order to explore the possibility of a friendly settlement based on respect for the human rights enshrined in the American Convention”. On April 7, 1999, the Commission forwarded the note to the petitioners. 19. On May 7, 1999, in reply to the State’s note of March 9, 1999, the petitioners stated, inter alia, that “the seriousness of the facts denounced in the present case does not allow a friendly settlement, in a way that is compatible with the Convention” and “respectfully request[ed] the Commission that, in accordance with its competence, it should decide once and for all and without acceding to new delaying tactics by the Venezuelan State whether or not this case should be referred to the Inter-American Court…”. 20. On the same May 7, 1999, following a meeting between the parties that did not achieve a settlement of the case, the Commission, during its 103rd special session, decided to refer the case to the Court. 21. In a note of May 23, 1999, Venezuela presented a document with annexes in which it “formally notifie[d] the Commission that the State of Venezuela had complied with the recommendations contained in its report” No. 83/98. The same day, the Secretariat of the Commission sent this document by courier to the