4 14. On August 10, 1990 the Commission opened Case Nº 10.602 which it maintained under consideration until October 12, 1993, when, pursuant to Article 50 of the American Convention, it adopted Report Nº 29/93 containing the following provisions: 7.1 It is recommended that the Venezuelan Government punish the persons responsible for the commission and covering-up of the crime of homicide to the detriment of the victims from "El Amparo." 7.2 It is recommended that the Venezuelan Government pay fair compensation to the next-of-kin of the victims. 7.3 It is recommended that the Venezuelan Government adopt domestic legislative provisions, in accordance with its constitutional and legal procedures, in order to revise and modify the Military Code of Justice in regards to the articles analyzed in this Report. 7.4 It is recommended that the Venezuelan Government (in accordance with the recommendations in paragraphs 7(1), 7(2) and 7(3)) inform the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, within three months, about the measures it adopts in this case. 15. On January 11, 1994, the Government requested a reconsideration of the previous report, and the scheduling of a hearing to present new facts and legal arguments. By note of January 12, 1994, the Commission answered that it would consider said request during its 85th Regular Session, and that it would opportunely schedule a hearing to receive the representatives of the Government. On this same date, the Government submitted two documents containing its allegations relative to Report Nº 29/93. On January 14, 1994, the Commission rejected the request for reconsideration and decided to confirm Report Nº 29/93 and submit the case to the Inter-American Court. III 16. The Court is competent to hear the instant case. Venezuela is a State Party to the Convention since August 9, 1977, and accepted the Court's contentious jurisdiction on July 24, 1981. IV 17. In its answer, Venezuela pointed out in relationship to "the Facts referred to in the Petition . . . [that] neither does it contest them nor does it express objections as to the merits, since these very facts are being tried by the competent courts of the Republic (at this time by the Ad Hoc Military Court)." It added that [w]hile the Republic of Venezuela does not either contest or object to this action and the objective responsibility for which it could be liable, due to the abnormal circumstances which surrounded this case internally and at the Inter-American Commission, the moral and political responsibility does not pertain to the Government of the Republic, let alone to the higher authorities of the State of Venezuela. 18. On October 28, 1994, the Secretariat received a copy of the judgment of the Ad Hoc Military Court on the "El Amparo" Case, dated June 12, 1994. In its judgment it concluded that "the irregularities noted by the Criminal Cassation Section of the Supreme Court in its judgment dated ninth (9) of November, nineteen hundred ninety-three had been corrected and that it had OVERRULED the judgment . . . [and consequently] it acquitted the accused." 19. By note of January 11, 1995 the Government informed the President that Venezuela "does not contest the facts referred to in the complaint and accepts the international responsibility of the State," and requested the Court to ask the Commission "to come together to a non-litigious

Seleccionar párrafo de destino3