5 18. After analyzing the arguments supporting said request and the comments the State filed thereon, on February 2, 2007, the Court decided to dismiss the request as inadmissible. V ACCEPTANCE BY THE STATE OF REPORT NO. 26/05 OF THE INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION 19. On February 18, 2006, the State declared that “it accept[ed] the conclusions of [R]eport No. 26/05 [(supra para. 8)] and ratified its will to comply with the recommendations contained therein.”10 20. Later, through communication of March 30, 2006, the State expressed “its true intent to fully comply with the recommendations […] contained”11 in Report 26/05. It further stated that the efforts made by the Government […] to reach an agreement with the applicant as regards pecuniary reparations –the preferential compliance of which was specifically requested by the latterhave been unsuccessful, since the compensatory amounts claimed failed to conform to the applicable international standards. In this regard […] it formally request[ed] [the Commission] to […] bring the instant case to the consideration of the […] Inter-American Court of Human Rights so that, in its capacity as the only jurisdictional body of the system, it may determine the reparations due to the victim according to the 12 facts and conclusions included in [R]eport 26/05. 21. In the application filed with the Court, the Commission referred to the State’s acceptance in the following terms: [h]aving accepted the conclusions of Report 26/05, the State acquiesced to the conclusions of fact and law contained therein; therefore, said acquiescence has full legal effects. The Commission considers that the State’s acquiescence constitutes a positive contribution to the development of this 13 process. 22. In its answer to the application, the State ratified that it accepts the conclusions contained in [R]eport 26/05 adopted by the […] Commission […], as well as the legal consequences deriving therefrom. Without prejudice to this acceptance, the State fil[ed] some comments on different issues concerning the claims on reparations, as well as the persons […] identified as possible beneficiaries, in relation to the comments on the brief of requests, arguments, and evidence filed by Mr. Bueno-Alves’ representative. 23. Likewise, at the public hearing held in the instant case (supra para. 14), the State’s Agent asserted, inter alia, that in keeping with its traditional policy of cooperation with the bodies of the Inter-American system, the Argentine government decided to accept the conclusions of said report, undertaking full responsibility in the case and the legal consequences deriving therefrom. 10 Cf. Note No. 41/06 of February 18, 2006, issued by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, International Trade, and Culture of Argentina (record of appendixes to the application, Appendix 3, folio 39). 11 Cf. Record of appendixes to the application, Appendix 11, Volume III, folio 3673. 12 Cf. Record of appendixes to the application, Appendix 11, Volume III, folio 3673. 13 Cf. Brief containing the application, (record on the merits, Volume I, folio 4).