12 a) that this preliminary objection is closely linked to the first and arises from the State’s conceptual error of equating the report under Article 51 of the Convention with the application; b) that the Convention does not require a report to be prepared on the referral of the case to the Court; to the contrary, it only requires that the application should be presented within three calendar months from the date that Report No. 37/97 was transmitted to the State; and c) that as the alleged facts which would establish that the Commission’s right to file the application had expired are not grounded, the Court should reject the objection that has been filed. *** 34. The Court proceeds to consider the first and fourth preliminary objections. 35. The State declared that the Commission did not proceed in accordance with the provisions of the Convention and its Regulations with regard to referring the case to the Court, because the report mentioned in Article 51.1 of the Convention is of a final nature and is the only instrument by which the referral of a case to the Court may be ordered. 36. Article 51 of the Convention states that: 1. If, within a period of three months from the date of the transmittal of the report of the Commission to the States concerned, the matter has not either been settled or submitted by the Commission or by the State concerned to the Court and its jurisdiction accepted, the Commission may, by the vote of an absolute majority of its members, set forth its opinion and conclusions concerning the question submitted for its consideration. 37. Article 50 of the Convention concerns the preparation of a report by the Commission that is transmitted to the State, which may not publish it; it contains a series of recommendations to be complied with to settle the matter. If, within the three months following the transmittal of the report to the State, the matter has not been settled and the Commission considers that the State did not comply, it has two options: to refer the case to the Court, by filing an application or to draw up the report referred to in Article 51 of the Convention, which, by the vote of an absolute majority of its members, shall set forth its opinion and conclusions concerning the question submitted for its consideration. As in the Article 50 report, in the Article 51 report, the Commission shall prescribe a period within which the State must take the necessary measures to comply with the recommendations and, thus, remedy the situation that is being examined. Lastly, once this period has expired, the Commission shall determine whether the State has complied and, if appropriate, decide whether to publish the report (cfr: Articles 50 and 51 of the Convention). The Court has already stated that this decision is not discretional, but rather “should be based on the alternative most favorable for the protection of the human rights” established in the Convention. (Certain Attributes of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (Articles 41, 42, 44, 46, 47, 50 and 51 of the American Convention on Human Rights), Advisory Opinion OC-13/93 of July 16, 1993. Series A No. 13, para. 54). 38. Once a case has been referred to the Court, the provisions of Article 51 of the Convention are not applicable, because the filing of an application is subject to the