4 15. The application was lodged with the Court on July 2, 1999 (supra 2). The Commission appointed Hélio Bicudo and Carlos Ayala Corao as its delegates; Hernando Valencia Villa and Christina Cerna as advisors, and Lourdes Flores Nano, Carlos Chipoco, Manuel Aguirre Roca, Raúl Ferrero Costa, Juan Monroy Gálvez and Valentín Paniagua Corazao as assistants. 16. A preliminary examination of the application found that some annexes were either incomplete or illegible and the names and domiciles of all the petitioners were not included. Consequently, on July 12 and 14, 1999, pursuant to Article 34 of the Court’s Rules of Procedure, the Commission was asked to retransmit them. On July 15, 16 and 23, 1999, the Commission forwarded part of the requested documentation. 17. In a note of July 12, 1999, the Secretariat of the Court (hereinafter “the Secretariat”) notified the application to the State, and informed it of the periods for answering it, filing preliminary objections and appointing its agents. It also advised the State that it had the right to appoint an ad hoc Judge. 18. On July 16, 1999, the Peruvian Ambassador to Costa Rica visited the seat of the Court to return the application and the annexes in the instant case. This official handed the Secretariat a note dated July 15, 1999, signed by the Minister for Foreign Affairs a.i. of Peru, which stated that 1. By Legislative Resolution dated July 8, 1999, [...] the Congress of the Republic approved the withdrawal of the recognition of the contentious jurisdiction of the InterAmerican Court of Human Rights. 2. On July 9, 1999, the Government of the Republic of Peru deposited with the General Secretariat of the Organization of American State (OAS), the instrument wherein it declares that, pursuant to the American Convention on Human Rights, the Republic of Peru is withdrawing the declaration consenting to the optional clause concerning recognition of the contentious jurisdiction of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights[...]. 3. [...T]he withdrawal of the recognition of the Court’s contentious jurisdiction takes immediate effect as of the date on which the said instrument was deposited with the General Secretariat of the OAS, that is, July 9, 1999, and applies to all cases in which Peru has not answered the application filed with the Court. Finally, the State declared in its letter that [...] the notification contained in note CDH-11,760/002, of July 12, 1999, concerns a case in which the Honorable Court is no longer competent to hear the applications filed against the Republic of Peru, under the contentious jurisdiction provided for in the American Convention on Human Rights. On July 19, that year, this letter was forwarded to the Commission and it was asked to submit its comments. 19. On August 27, 1999, the International Human Rights Law Group submitted a brief in the capacity of amicus curiae. On September 15, 1999, Curtis Francis Doebbler and Alberto Borea Odría submitted briefs in the same capacity. 20. On September 10, 1999, the Commission submitted its comments on the return of the application and its annexes by the State. In its brief it stated that: