4 5) On December 19, 1997, the State submitted its observations on the petition, making reference to the merits. On January 12, 1998, these observations were transmitted to the petitioners, who filed their own observations on February 25 of the same year. On March 16, 1998, the Commission forwarded the petitioners’ observations to the State and requested a reply. 6) Also on December 19, 1997, the petitioners supplied the Commission with a supplementary written submission providing further evidence, case law and other information in support of the admissibility of the petition, and specified the relief sought on behalf of Mr. Hilaire. The communication was forwarded to the State on January 12, 1998 and it presented its rejoinder on April 1, of the same year. This rejoinder was transmitted to the petitioners on May 13, 1998. On June 24, 1998, the petitioners filed their observations and these were transmitted to the State on July 13, 1998, accompanied by a request for a reply. 7) On September 25, 1998, the Commission issued Report No. 43/98, in which it concluded that the petition was admissible. On October 23 of the same year, the Commission forwarded this Report to the State and the petitioners, and placed itself at their disposal with a view to seeking a friendly settlement of the matter. 8) On September 28, 1998, the petitioners presented a second supplementary written submission, which was transmitted to the State on October 6 of the same year, with a request for a reply. 9) On or about February 12, 1999, the petitioners delivered a third supplementary written submission with appendices, and on or about March 12 of the same year, they delivered additional written submissions to the Commission. On April 5, 1999, the Commission forwarded the pertinent parts of the additional written submissions to the State with a request for observations. The State did not respond to this request. 10) On April 21, 1999, the Commission adopted the Report on the merits No. 66/99, which it transmitted to the State on April 26, 1999. In the operative part of the said Report, the Commission recommended that the State: (I) Grant the petitioner an effective remedy which includes consideration for an early release or commutation of sentence and compensation; (II) Adopt such legislative or other measures as may be necessary to insure that the death penalty is imposed in compliance with the rights and freedoms guaranteed under the Convention; [and] (III) Adopt such legislative or other measures as may be necessary to ensure that the right under Article 7(5) of the Convention to trial within a reasonable time or to be released is given effect in Trinidad and Tobago, including effective recourse to a competent court or tribunal for protection against acts that violate that right. 11) On May 18, 1999, the State delivered to the Commission its response to this Report. 12) On May 23, 1999, the Inter-American Commission, pursuant to Article 51 of the American Convention, decided to submit the case to the Court.