1, 2010, the Thirteenth Civil Judge of Pichincha issued a decision in order to deliver judgment.82 In addition, Mr. Ascázubi Albán filed an undated “administrative complaint” against the State represented by the Constitutional President and his legal representative, the Attorney General. 83 On October 12, 2006, the office of the President of the Republic advised that this had been forwarded to the Attorney General.84 On February 8, 2007, the latter established “that the case should be forwarded to the Alternate President [of the Supreme Court], to continue with the legal procedures.”85 On April 10, 2007, the President of the Supreme Court of Justice asked the plaintiff to clarify the claim within three days and to specify the persons who should be notified of the claim.86 67. In relation to Mr. López Ortiz, on July 21, 2008, he filed a claim for compensation for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage against the Attorney General and the National Police.87 On September 25, 2008, the Twentieth Civil Court of Pichincha, Quito, took over the hearing of the case under the ordinary procedure pursuant to article 59 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The claim was notified to the Attorney General and the National Police.88 On September 29, 201, that court issued a judicial decision in which it decided, “based on the request made and in view of the stage of the case, the proceedings will be reviewed in order to deliver judgment.”89 On April 30, 2015, the judge of the Civil Judicial Unit recused himself ratione materiae and ordered that the case be forwarded to the Judicial Unit for Administrative Disputes in Quito to continue with the substantiation and settlement of the case.90 On May 19, 2015, the Quito District Court for Administrative Disputes received the proceedings owing to the recusal of the civil judge. 91 On November 8, 2018, the District Court for Administrative Disputes of the Metropolitan District of Quito, province of Pichincha, assumed the hearing of the case and indicated that, owing to its procedural load owing to proceedings initiated before the General Organic Procedural Code came into effect, the plaintiff’s request for judgment would be dealt with in the chronological order in which the case had been received.92 VII. MERITS 68. The Court will now consider and decide the merits of the dispute in the instant case in relation to the alleged violation of personal liberty owing to the unlawful and arbitrary detention required by Pichincha relating to this and other briefs filed by Mr. Ascázubi Albán during the proceeding, which verify its existence (evidence file, fs. 4534 to 4542). Cf. Decision of the Thirteenth Judge of Pichincha in the civil trial instituted at the request of Leoncio Amílcar Ascázubi of September 1, 2010 (evidence file, f. 459). 82 Cf. “Administrative complaint” against the State represented by the Constitutional President and his legal representative, the Attorney General, undated (evidence file, fs. 4548 to 4556). It should, however, be noted that it shows the date that the Correspondence Department of the Office of the President of the Republic received it: October 4, 2006. 83 84 Cf. Communication from the Office of the President of the Republic of October 12, 2006 (evidence file, f. 4559). 85 Cf. Decision of the Alternate President of the Supreme Court of Justice of February 8, 2007 (evidence file, f. 4561). 86 Cf. Decision of the President of the Supreme Court of Justice of April 10, 2007 (evidence file, f. 4560). Cf. Claim for compensation for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage against the Ecuadorian State represented by the Attorney General, and the Police Institution represented by the Police Commander General, filed on July 21, 2008 (evidence file, fs. 4507 to 4521). 87 Cf. Judicial decision of the Twentieth Civil Court of Pichincha, Quito, of September 25, 2008 (evidence file, fs. 4524 and 4525). 88 89 Cf. Judicial decision of the Twentieth Civil Court of Pichincha, Quito, of September 29, 2008 (evidence file, f. 4527). Cf. Recusal of the judge of the Civil Court of the Metropolitan District of Quito with regard to the claim for compensation filed by Fernando Marcelo López Ortiz, of April 30, 2015 (evidence file, f. 461 and 462). 90 Cf. Decision of District Court for Administrative Disputes No. 1 with regard to the claim for compensation filed by Fernando Marcelo López Ortiz, of May 19, 2015 (evidence file, f. 464). 91 Cf. Decision of the District Court for Administrative Disputes of the Metropolitan District of Quito, province of Pichincha, Quito of November 8, 2018 (evidence file, f. 4533). 92 19