6. The hearing took place on October 11, 2011, during the forty-fourth special session of the Court, held in Bridgetown, Barbados.5 During the hearing, the Court asked the parties to provide specific additional information when submitting their written final arguments. 7. On November 14 and 16, 2011, the representatives, the State, and the InterAmerican Commission sent their respective final written arguments and observations. With their briefs, the State and the representatives submitted documents that were forwarded to the other parties so that they could make any observations they deemed relevant. In addition, on November 29, 2011, under Article 58(b) of the Rules of Procedure, the State was requested to forward specific information and documentation as helpful evidence by December 14, at the latest.6 On December 14, 2011, Argentina requested an extension and this was granted by the Court, establishing a new deadline for receiving the information of January 23, 2012. On January 24, 2012, Argentina presented some information, although not the information that had been specifically requested, and the State was advised of this situation. On February 28, 2012, Argentina forwarded another brief containing part of the information requested by the Court as helpful evidence. The Court informed the State that the admissibility of this documentation would be considered at the appropriate opportunity7 (infra para. 12). 8. In addition, the Court received amicus curiae briefs from the following persons and institutions: (1) Laura Clérico and Liliana Ronconi, professors of the Law School of the Universidad de Buenos Aires; (2) Diana Mafia, Legislator of the Autonomous City of Buenos Aires; (3) the Committee against Torture of the Comisión Provincial por la Memoria [the Provincial Commission for Memory]; 8 (4) the Adoptar Foundation, 9 and (5) Laura María Giosa, Simón Conforti, Renzo Adrián Sujodolski, Marisa Herrera and Lucas E. Barreiros, coordinators of the master’s programs in family, children’s and adolescents’ law and international human rights law of the Law School of the Universidad de Buenos Aires. III JURISDICTION 9. The Inter-American Court has jurisdiction to hear this case in accordance with Article 62(3) of the American Convention on Human Rights, because Argentina has been a State Party to the American Convention since September 5, 1984, and accepted the binding jurisdiction of the Court on that same date. 5 There appeared at this hearing: (a) for the Inter-American Commission: Luz Patricia Mejía Guerrero, Delegate and Silvia Serrano Guzmán, legal adviser; (b) for the representatives: Susana Ana María Terenzi and Margarita R. Nicoliche, and (c) for the State: Alberto Javier Salgado, Julia Loreto, Andrea Gladys Gualde, María Eugenia Carbone, and Marisa Graham. 6 Cf. Note of the Secretariat of the Court REF.: CDH-12.584/108 of November 29, 2011, requesting the State to forward: (a) a complete copy of the civil and criminal judgments referred to in the attachment to its final written arguments, in the case identified as “E.Z. ref/guardianship. March 2010. Civil Court No. 38”; (b) information on whether the act of surrendering a child in exchange for financial compensation or payment is a criminal offense under domestic law and, in this regard, it should provide any observations it deems pertinent, and (c) detailed information on the steps taken by the State in order to verify whether the actions of the officials who intervened in the different domestic proceedings concerning this case were in keeping with the law and, if appropriate, the results. 7 Cf. Notes of the Secretariat of the Court REF.: CDH-12.584/111, 114 and 117 of December 20, 2011, and January 31 and March 6, 2012. 8 The brief was filed by Adolfo Perez Esquivel, Aldo Etchegoyen, Alejandro Mosquera, Elisa Carca and Roberto F. Cipriano García, directors of the Comisión Provincial por la Memoria. 9 The brief was filed by Julio Cesar Ruiz, President of the Adoptar Foundation. 5