it offered to provide Mr. Romero Rivera with “national protection” and, according to the representatives, he had accepted this. Consequently, the Inter-American Court, in an Order issued on September 1, 2011, decided not to order the provisional measures requested, “based on the complementary and subsidiary nature of the inter-American system.” 6 7. On September 12, 2011, Guatemala submitted to the Court its brief answering the submission of the case by the Commission and with observations on the motions and arguments brief (hereinafter “the answering brief”). In this brief, the State filed a preliminary objection and made a partial acknowledgment of international responsibility (infra paras. 13 and 28). Nevertheless, it contested several of the violations presented by the Inter-American Commission and alleged by the representatives. Additionally, the State opposed considering Mario Alcides Polanco Pérez and Andrea Polanco Montenegro as victims in this case and referred to the reparations requested. The State appointed María Elena de Jesús Rodríguez López as its Agent for this case, and Enma Estela Hernández Tuv de Iboy as its Deputy Agent. 8. On November 20 and 21, 2011, the representatives and the Inter-American Commission, respectively, presented their observations on the preliminary objection filed by the State. At that time, the Commission also presented its observations on the State’s partial acknowledgment of responsibility. The representatives did not comment in this regard. 9. On March 16, 2012, the President of the Court issued an Order, 7 in which he convened the Inter-American Commission, the representatives, and the State to a public hearing (infra para. 11) in order to receive the statement of one presumed victim and the testimony of two witnesses, and also to hear the final oral arguments of the representatives and the State, and the final oral observations of the Commission on the preliminary objection, the State’s acknowledgment of responsibility, the merits, the reparations, and the costs. In addition, the President ordered that the statements of one presumed victim and one witness be received by affidavit, and these were received on April 18 and 20, 2012. The representatives and the State were given the opportunity to question the witnesses offered by the opposing party and make observations on their testimony. 10. On April 24, 2012, the State informed the Court that, on April 20, 2012, an agreement had been signed by Guatemala and the victims in this case, through their representatives, on the measures of reparation requested, and it provided a copy of this document (infra para. 13.e). 11. The public hearing was held on April 26, 2012, during the forty-fifth special session of the Court, held in Guayaquil, Ecuador. 8 Prior to the hearing, the State desisted from offering the testimony of Marco Tulio Álvarez Bobadilla. In this regard, the Commission asked that the opinion given by this expert witness in the case of Gudiel Álvarez et al. 6 Cf. Case of García and family members v. Guatemala. Order of the Inter-American Court of September 1, 2011, first operative paragraph 7 Cf. Case of García and family members v. Guatemala. Order of the President of the Inter-American Court of March 16, 2012. Available at: http://www.corteidh.or.cr/docs/asuntos/Garcíayfam.pdf 8 At this hearing there appeared: (a) for the Inter-American Commission: Jesús Orozco Henríquez, President of the Commission, Isabel Madariaga, Karla Quintana and Silvia Serrano, Secretariat specialists, and Michael Camilleri, specialist of the Special Rapporteurship for Freedom of Expression; (b) for the representatives: Maynor Estuardo Alvarado Galeano, and (c) for the State: Antonio Arenales Forno, Secretary for Peace (SEPAZ); Jorge Humberto Herrera Castillo, President of the National Compensation Program; María Elena de Jesús Rodríguez López, Agent of the State, and Heydée Calderón, from the Presidential Commission for Coordination of the Policy of the Executive on Human Rights (COPREDEH). 6