3 requested the Court to order the State to comply with the rest of the commitments acquired and effectively repair the alleged victims. 5. On February 29, 2008 the State presented its response to the petition and its observations to the brief of pleadings and motions (hereinafter “defendant’s response”). In said brief the State indicated that on August 8, 2005, during the process before the Inter-American Commission, Guatemala and the representatives signed an agreement of reparations and compliance of the recommendations made by the Commission. It also informed the Tribunal that through said agreement the State acknowledged its international responsibility for the facts and violations stated in Report No. 71/04. Likewise, The State indicated that it had adopted some of the recommendations of the Commission to repair the violations to human rights, specifically: an act of apology presided by the Vice-President of the Republic, payment of an economic compensation to the next of kin of María and Josefa Tiu Tojín, and the construction of a monument in their memory. Therefore, it asked the Court that upon deciding on the present case “it take into consideration the reparation measures implemented by the State and its compliance according to the [representatives’] requirements.” Similarly, the State acknowledged “the unjustified delay in the investigation, prosecution, and punishment of those responsible for the facts of this case, within the domestic realm, claim regarding which it stated its acquiescence.” The State appointed Mrs. Yovana Ester López Salguero as Agent and Mrs. Viviana González as Deputy Agent. II PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COURT 6. The Commission’s application was notified to the State and the representatives on October 31, 2007. During the proceedings before this Tribunal, besides the presentation of the main briefs forwarded by the parties (supra paras. 1, 4, and 5), the President of the Court2 (hereinafter “the President”) ordered she receive, through statements offered before a notary public (affidavit), the testimonies of a witness and an expert offered in a timely manner by the Commission and the representatives. Subsequently, the Commission desisted of the testimonial statement, reason for which only the expert’s statement was received and regarding which the State had the opportunity to present observations. Additionally, in consideration of the specific circumstances of the case, the President summoned the Commission, the representatives, and the State to a public hearing in order to receive the statements of a witness and an expert proposed by the Commission and the representatives, as well as the oral arguments on the merits and possible reparations and costs. 7. The public hearing was held on April 30, 2008 during the XXXIII Extraordinary Sessions of the Court, held in the city of Tegucigalpa, Honduras.3 2 Cfr. order issued by the President of the Inter-American Court of March 14, 2008 in the present case. 3 The following appeared at this hearing: a) for the Inter-American Commission: Víctor Abramovich, Delegate, Isabel Madariaga, advisor, and Juan Pablo Albán, advisor F. 343; b) in representation of the alleged victims: Mario Minera, Executive Director of CALDH, and Angélica González, legal advisor (CALDH) F. 341, and c) for the State: Ruth del Valle Escobar, President of the Presidential Human Rights Commission, Yovana López Salguero, agent, and Viviana González, deputy agent.