matter of international public order– the Court must ensure that acts of acquiescence be acceptable for the purposes sought by the inter-American system.10 B.1 Facts 21. The Court verifies that the admission made by the State did not expressly refer to the facts presented by the Commission in its Report on the Merits. However, based on the statements made by the State during the public hearing and in its final written arguments, the Court understands that the admission made was based on the acceptance of some facts claimed by the Commission. This is the case, in the first place, of the facts related to the kidnapping of Fredy Núñez Naranjo from the Quero Canton police station, where he was detained on July 15, 2001, without his whereabouts being known to date. 22. The Court notes that the State disputed the legal classification of these events because, unlike what was stated by the Commission, it considers that an enforced disappearance did not occur, but rather a criminal offense for which private individuals were apparently responsible. The respective analysis will be addressed by the Court in the substantive chapter of this Judgment (infra paras. 81-100). 23. Furthermore, the Court finds that the partial acknowledgement of responsibility implies the acceptance of the facts presented by the Commission in its Report on the Merits in relation to the efforts made by the State within the framework of the investigation and the criminal proceeding aimed at punishing those responsible for the kidnapping of Mr. Núñez Naranjo from the aforementioned police station.11 24. The Court holds that there is no dispute whatsoever about the facts mentioned supra. B.2 Legal claims 25. The State conceded regarding the violations of the rights to a fair trial and to judicial protection generated as a result of the insufficient actions aimed at investigating what happened and sanctioning those responsible. This Court finds that, consequently, the dispute regarding the violation of Articles 8(1) and 25(1) of the American Convention, respectively, in conjunction with Article 1(1) of this same instrument, has ceased for the reasons mentioned, to the detriment of Fredy Núñez Naranjo and his family members. 26. A different conclusion is required, however, regarding the alleged violations of the American Convention and the IACFDP derived from the alleged enforced disappearance of Fredy Núñez Naranjo and the violations of the American Convention allegedly derived from the lack of investigation of the physical assaults allegedly suffered by Fredy Núñez Naranjo's mother and one of his sisters. None of them were the subject matter of the admission of state responsibility. 27. The Court notes, therefore, that the dispute over the alleged state responsibility persists, which results from: a) The violation of the rights to juridical personality, to life, to humane treatment, and to personal liberty, as provided in Articles 3, 4(1), 5(1), 5(2), and 7 of the American Convention, in relation 10 Cf. Case of Kimel v. Argentina. Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of May 2, 2008. Series C No. 177, para. 24, and Case of Aguinaga Aillón v. Ecuador. Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of January 30, 2023. Series C No. 483, para. 16. 11 Cf. Paragraphs 35 to 53 of the Report on the Merits of the Commission (case file on the merits, pages 12 to 16). -8-