9 39. The Court, exercising its powers inherent to the international judicial protection of human rights, may determine whether an acknowledgement of international responsibility made by a respondent State provides sufficient ground, pursuant to the terms of the American Convention, to proceed with the merits and the determination of the reparations and costs. To such effect, the Court shall analyze each particular case.3 40. On April 4, 2006, at the beginning of the public hearing held, the State alleged, inter alia, that: The Venezuelan State has come today to this hearing to express the acknowledgement of the facts, to [...] honor the memory of those that have died, to acknowledge the truth and to seek justice. The State considers that it is its obligation to acknowledge all the facts as charged, this is a formal admission. 41. After the statements above, Venezuela, in response to the questions asked by the President, expressly stated: a) that it acknowledges its responsibility for the events as described in the application and in the brief of requests and arguments, and b) it “totally” admits without any objection, all the claims, as expressed in the application, including those related to the reparations. The State pointed out that “there is no reserve whatsoever [in the admission], since the detainees were under [its] custody.” 42. Afterwards, the State offered a public apology to the next of kin of the victims in the instant case and requested the Court for a minute of silence in their memory: Mrs. Nelly Madrid and Mr. Gavidia, the Venezuelan State wants to offer a minute of silence to the memory of your next of kin. [The State] deeply [...] regrets all the vicissitudes that might have occurred and the pain you have endured during these years [...] because you spent thirteen years waiting for justice to be done. On this day, [...] the Venezuelan State is willing to accept all the allegations that have been made and acknowledge and repair all the pain that you have suffered. 43. During said public hearing, in the submission of the final oral arguments, the Commission made reference to the acknowledgement of responsibility made by the State and stated as follows: The Commission appreciates the acknowledgement of responsibility made by Venezuela in its declaration made on this date. The Inter-American Commission notices that Venezuela accepts all the facts of the case and the legal claims, and therefore, it requests [...] the Court to consider them proved and to include the same in the Judgment on the merits, because to establish the truth of the facts is important for the victims of human rights violations and for their the next of kin and, in the instant case, for the Venezuelan society as a whole. 44. The representatives, “like the Commission, recognized the value of the admission made by the State” and requested the Court to include in the Judgment a determination regarding “the excessive use of force” by the security forces of the State. 45. In a brief submitted by the State during the public hearing (supra para. 26,) Venezuela pointed out that: 3 Cf. Case of Baldeón-García. Judgment of April 6, 2006. Series C No. 147, para. 38; Case of Acevedo-Jaramillo et al. Judgment of February 7, 2006. Series C No. 144, para. 173, and Case of BlancoRomero et al. Judgment of November 28, 2005. Series C No. 138, para. 55.