11 Walter Palomino-Cabezas, alternate agent Ana Reátegui-Napurí, counsel, and Jennie Vizcarra-Alvizuri, counsel for the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights: Oscar Luján-Fappiano, delegate Christina Cerna, attorney Verónica Reyna, assistant, and Nelson Caucota, assistant. 45. On July 14, 1998, the Secretariat, following instructions of the Court, requested that the Commission remit the minutes of the session in which it decided to send the present case to the Court, and any document in which it was recorded that the alleged victims knew of the motions made on their behalf before the Commission, notwithstanding the petitioners were rented with power of representations. On July 29, 1998, the Commission sent the requested documents. 46. On July 14 and August 3, 1998, the Secretariat, following instructions of the Court, requested that the State send official document number 521-DIVICOTEDINCOTE dated October 19, 1993. The State forwarded the requested document to the Court which was received by the Secretariat of the Court on August 7, 1998. 47. On August 24, 1998, the State objected to the minutes of the Commission (supra 45), because they were drawn up in English, and requested that they be sent in Spanish. On August 25, 1998, the Secretariat, following instructions of the President, sent a translation of the minutes to the State and the Commission, so that they would both be aware of the content of the translation. The time period granted for their comments expired on August 28, 1998, without the Secretariat receiving comments from the parties. 48. On September 1, 1998, the State reported on certain questions related to Chilean consular assistance in Peru. This communication was transmitted to the Commission on September 3, accompanied by a request that the Commission send to the Court within twenty-four hours any comments that it deemed pertinent. V JURISDICTION 49. Peru has been a State Party to the American Convention since July 28, 1978, and accepted the contentious jurisdiction of the Court on January 21, 1981. Consequently, the Court is competent, pursuant to Article 62(3) of the Convention, to consider the preliminary objections submitted by the State. VI PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS 50. The objections raised by Peru basically refer to the following procedural matters: exhaustion of domestic remedies (cfr. first, second, third, and fourth