9 36. The written memorial presented at the end of the hearing confirmed the amounts of the compensatory damages sought for the family of Mr. Garrido and specified the names of his six siblings. The compensatory damages requested for the family of Mr. Baigorria during the hearing were the same as those indicated in the written memorial, except in the case of the earnings, which were 750 pesos higher in the memorial. The memorial also mentioned the names of his four siblings. It requested that the Court order payment of the honoraria of Mr. Varela-Alvarez and Mr. Lavado, although the amounts were not specified. The victims’ relatives also sought other forms of reparations as well, primarily "satisfaction" and "sanctions", as follows: 7. SATISFACTION MEASURES. 7.1. Amendment of the Argentine Criminal Code and the Argentine Code of Criminal Procedure. As we indicated earlier, we are requesting that forced disappearance be typified in the Code as a federal offense. 7.2. Apologies to the families of the victims by the highest authorities of the Argentine Government and the Government of Mendoza, in a private meeting with them, and publication of those apologies in newspapers with large circulations. 7.3. Restoration of good name. A commemorative plaque in memory of the disappeared, placed in the Mendoza federal courthouse. 7.4. Investigation and sanctioning of the judges and prosecutors involved in the examining phase of the inquiry into the victims’ disappearance. 7.5. A final deadline by which time the NATIONAL GOVERNMENT is to have punished those directly and indirectly criminally responsible for the victims’ disappearance and their immediate demotion of police rank. 8. SANCTIONS. It is our position that the ARGENTINE GOVERNMENT should be sanctioned. Although it admitted responsibility, it has done nothing to take into custody and/or punish the material and intellectual authors of the crime, accessories after the fact, and the judges and prosecutors who mishandled the inquiry into the disappearance of citizens BAIGORRIA and GARRIDO. V COMPETENCE OF THE COURT 37. The Court is competent to rule on the payment of reparations and compensation in the instant case. Argentina has been a State Party to the American Convention since September 5, 1984, the date on which it accepted the contentious jurisdiction of the Court. This case was submitted to the Court by the Commission in accordance with Articles 51 and 61 of the American Convention. The Court delivered the judgment on the merits of the instant case on February 2, 1996. VI OBLIGATION TO MAKE REPARATIONS (ARTICLE 63(1)) 38. In the instant case, Argentina admitted its responsibility for the facts set forth in the Commission’s application and it was so recorded in the judgment of February 2, 1996 (supra, 17). Hence, the facts recounted in section II of the Commission’s application of May 29, 1995, have been established. On the other hand, the parties