I REQUEST FOR INTERPRETATION AND PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COURT 1. On November 28, 2018, the Court issued the judgement on merits, reparations, and costs in this case, which was notified to the parties and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the Inter-American Commission” and “the Commission”) on December 20 of the same year. 2. On March 14, 2019, the representatives of the victims (hereinafter “the representatives”) submitted a request for interpretation regarding: a) the scope and obligations related to the determination of the whereabouts of Nitza Paola, José Ángel y Rocío Irene Alvarado, and b) the scope and timeline related to the measure of reparation about the National Register of Missing and Disappeared Persons. 3. On April 1, 2019, according to Article 68(2) of the Rules of Procedures and following the instructions of the President of the Court, the Court’s Secretariat sent the request for interpretation to the parties and the Commission and gave them until April 23 to present the written observations they considered relevant. 4. On April 23 and 29, 2019, the State and the Commission, respectively, submitted their observations to the request for interpretation submitted by the representatives. II JURISDICTION 5. Article 67 of the American Convention establishes that: The judgment of the Court shall be final and not subject to appeal. In case of disagreement as to the meaning or scope of the judgment, the Court shall interpret it at the request of any of the parties, provided the request is made within ninety days from the date of notification of the judgment. 6. Pursuant to said article, the Court has jurisdiction to interpret its judgments. In order to examine the request for interpretation and to decide on this matter, the Court must, whenever possible, be composed of the same judges who delivered the corresponding judgment, in accordance with Article 68(3) of the Rules of Procedure (supra). III ADMISSIBILITY 7. The Court must verify if the request submitted by the representatives meets the requirements established in the applicable rules for requests of interpretation of judgments, namely, Article 67 of the Convention, previously cited, and Article 68 of the Rules of Procedure, which establishes in its pertinent part, that: 1. The request for interpretation referred to in Article 67 of the Convention may be made in connection with judgments on preliminary objections, on the merits, or on reparations and costs, and shall be filed with the Secretariat. It shall state with precision questions relating to the meaning or scope of the judgment of which interpretation is requested. 2