80. Furthermore, in the same communication to the Commission, the State indicated that, regarding compliance with providing a public apology to the victims, it had made a publication in the Ecuadorian daily newspaper El Universo on January 25, 2012, the pertinent part of which read: “Ministry of Justice, Human Rights and Worship PUBLICATION OF A PUBLIC APOLOGY The Ecuadorian State profoundly regrets that State officials involved in the administration of justice unduly delayed the proceedings to the detriment of the victims and that it was not possible to clarify, within the framework of the guarantees of due process, those responsible for this fact. The Ecuadorian State, based on the Compliance Agreement signed by this Ministry and Melba Suárez Peralta on September 8, 2011, […] extends this public apology to Melba del Carmen Suárez Peralta and to her mother, Melba Peralta Mendoza, for having violated their human rights, specifically for not having guaranteed Articles 8(1) and 25(1) of the American Convention on Human Rights.” 124 81. Finally, on the same date, the State advised the Commission that it would install a plaque with a public apology in the building of the Provincial Court of Justice of the province of Guayas, to read as follows: 125 “REPUBLIC OF ECUADOR Ministry of Justice, Human Rights and Worship The Ecuadorian State, by this plaque, extends its public apology to Melba del Carmen Suárez Peralta and her mother, Melba Peralta Mendoza, for having violated their human rights, specifically for not having guaranteed Articles 8(1) and 25(1) of the American Convention on Human Rights, which refer to judicial guarantees and judicial protection. This plaque constitutes a form of reparation under the Compliance Agreement signed […] on September 8, 2011. […] Guayaquil, January 23, 2012.” 82. The plaque was installed in the Provincial Court of Justice of Guayas eon August 3, 2012. 126 B. Arguments of the Commission and of the parties 83. The representative indicated that: (a) the State signed the Compliance Agreement completely voluntarily; (b) the plaque installed on August 3, 2012, in the Provincial Court of Justice of Guayas textually acknowledges responsibility for the violation of Articles 8, 25 and 1(1) of the American Convention; (c) this represents an “act of express acknowledgement […] in the context of the proceedings before […] the Court […] after the State had been notified [of the submission of the case, and [of the [pleadings and motions] brief.” In addition, “the plaque was placed in the absence of the victim, [who was unaware of this act] until the State brought it up when the litigation was underway.” 84. The State indicated that: (a) estoppel had never arisen, because, given the nature of the proceedings before the Commission, a State may reach an agreement and undertake to implement certain measures without this signifying that the State is accepting as true the facts that it is accused of, or acknowledging that it is responsible for their legal 124 File of proceedings before the Commission, supra, folio 1632. 125 File of proceedings before the Commission, supra, folio 1630, and photograph of the plaque with the public apology (file of annexes to the answering brief, folio 2439 and 2341). 126 Photographs of the unveiling of the plaque (file of annexes to the answering brief, folios 2338 to 2341). 25