22 VI OPERATIVE PARAGRAPHS 52. Therefore, THE COURT, DECIDES: unanimously, 1. To reaffirm its April 23, 2004 Order, in which it deemed that all the preliminary objections raised by the State were withdrawn and it admitted acknowledgment of international responsibility by the State. 2. To find that the controversy regarding the facts that gave rise to the instant case has ceased. 3. To find, in accordance with the terms of the acknowledgment of international responsibility made by the State, that the latter breached the rights set forth in Articles 5(1) and 5(2) (Right to Humane Treatment); 8(1) (Right to Fair Trial); 11 (Right to Privacy); 12(2) and 12(3) (Freedom of Conscience and Religion); 13(2) paragraph a and 13(5) (Freedom of Thought and Expression), 16(1) (Freedom of Association), 21(1) and 21(2) (Right to Property), 24 (Right to Equal Protection) and 25 (Right to Judicial Protection) of the American Convention on Human Rights; and that it did not fulfill the obligation to respect rights set forth in Article 1(1) of that Convention, as set forth in paragraphs 47 and 48 of the instant Judgment. 4. To continue hearing the instant case in the stage of reparations and legal costs. Judges García Ramírez and Cançado Trindade made known to the Court their Separate Opinions, which are attached to this Judgment. Done in Spanish and English, the Spanish text being authentic, in San José, Costa Rica, on April 29, 2004. Sergio García-Ramírez President Alirio Abreu-Burelli Oliver Jackman Antônio A. Cançado Trindade Cecilia Medina-Quiroga Manuel E. Ventura-Robles Alejandro Sánchez-Garrido Judge ad hoc Pablo Saavedra-Alessandri Secretary So ordered, Diego García-Sayán