7 take into account the arguments of the Commission, the representatives of the victim and his next of kin, and the State. The State’s arguments 35. In its answer to the application, the State requested that its partial acquiescence regarding the violation of Articles 1(1) and 25 of the American Convention to the detriment of Marco Antonio Molina Theissen and of his next of kin should be taken into consideration. The State also requested that, should the InterAmerican Court declare “inadmissible any preliminary objection filed by the State, it [should] take into consideration [its] acquiescence […] regarding the violations that [the] Court considers it has competence to hear at the merits stage of the case.” 36. During the first public hearing on April 26, 2004, the State, “based on the facts set out in the application brief of the […] Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and [in the brief with requests, arguments and evidence] of the [representatives]:” 1. Reiter[ated] the acknowledgement of responsibility of the State of Guatemala in this case, made by the former President of the Republic, Alfonso Portillo Cabrera, on August 9, 2000. 2. Withdr[ew] the preliminary objections filed by the State during the processing of the case. 3. Acknowledge[d] its international responsibility for the violation of Articles 1(1), 2, 4(1), 5(1), 5(2), 7, 8, 17, 19 and 25 of the American Convention on Human Rights and for failing to comply with the international obligation acquired under Articles I and II of the Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearance of Persons, to the detriment of the child, Marco Antonio Molina Theissen, without broaching the issue of the determination of the specific or individual responsibility of the alleged perpetrators. 4. Request[ed] the […] Court, in the context of the proceeding, to consider that the hearing on merits had concluded, and that the statements of the witnesses and the reports of the expert witnesses should now provide information to the […] Court on the corresponding measures of reparation. 5. Ask[ed] the Court, should the State of Guatemala be obliged to make financial reparations to the […] victim and his next kin, whether the procedure for compensation by the State could be carried out in 2005, in view of the country’s current fiscal deficit. Lastly, in the public hearing, the State expressed its “profound regret for the acts endured and suffered by Marco Antonio Molina Theissen and his next of kin since October 6, 1981” and apologized as “a first gesture of respect, reparation and guarantee of non-repetition.” The Commission’s arguments 37. In the application, the Inter-American Commission indicated that on August 9, 2000, the President of the Republic of Guatemala, at that time, Alfonso Portillo, when referring to several cases being processed before the Commission, including the instant case, “acknowledge[d] the State’s institutional responsibility deriving from the failure to comply [with the] obligations arising from Article 1(1) of the American Convention to respect and ensure the rights embodied therein and from Articles 1, 2 and 3 of the Constitution of Guatemala,” and also stated that “[…] based on the foregoing, the Guatemalan Government accept[ed] that the relevant facts,