5 That same day, the Commission informed the petitioner that it had issued Report No. 34/03 on the merits of the case, and asked him to submit, within one month, his position on the pertinence of submitting the case to the Inter-American Court. The two-month period granted to the State ended on May 25, 2003, without the State having sent its comments. The Commission decided to submit the instant case to the Court. IV PROCEEDING BEFORE THE COURT 19. The Commission filed its application before the Court on June 25, 2003. 20. Pursuant to Articles 22 and 33 of the Rules of Procedure, the Commission appointed as its delegates Marta Altolaguirre and Santiago Canton, and as legal advisor it appointed Christina Cerna1. The Commission also stated that the original petitioner was Arthur Vercken. 21. On August 4, 2003 the Secretariat of the Court (hereinafter “the Secretariat”), after a preliminary examination of the application by the President of the Court (hereinafter “the President”), forwarded it to the State, with its appendixes, and informed the State of the deadlines to reply to it and to appoint its representatives in the proceeding. The Secretariat, under instructions by the President, also informed the State of its right to appoint an ad hoc Judge. 22. On August 4, 2003, pursuant to the provisions of Article 35(1)(e) of the Rules of Procedure, the Secretariat forwarded the application to CEJIL and to the Clínica de Derechos Humanos PUCE, as representatives of the alleged victim and his next of kin (hereinafter “representatives of the alleged victim and his next of kin” or “representatives”).2 23. On August 29, 2003 the State appointed as its Agents Juan Leoro Almeida, Ambassador of Ecuador before the Republic of Costa Rica and Erick Roberts, and as Deputy Agent Rodrigo Durango Cordero. It also appointed Hernán Salgado Pesantes as ad hoc Judge. 24. On September 30, 2003 the State sent a brief in which it filed preliminary objections. On October 2, 2003 the Secretariat informed the State that it would process said brief when Ecuador submitted its reply to the application and its comments on the written brief containing pleadings, motions, and evidence submitted by the representatives of the alleged victim, pursuant to Article 37(1) of the Rules of Procedure. 25. On October 3, 2003, after an extension requested by the representatives, they submitted their pleadings, motions, and evidence (hereinafter “brief containing pleadings and motions”). They asked the Court to find that the State had violated Articles 1(1) (Obligation to Respect Rights); 2 (Domestic Legal Effects); 5(1), 5(2) and 5(4) (Right to Humane Treatment); 7(1), 7(2), 7(3), 7(4), and 7(6) (Right to 1 During the processing of the instant case, the Commission made some changes in the appointment of its representatives before the Court. 2 During processing of the instant case, the representatives made some changes in the appointment of their representatives before the Court.