4. Legal notice of the application was provided to the representatives of the alleged victims and to the State of Argentina on July 5, 2010. 5. On September 19, 2010, Mrs. Verónica Heredia and Mrs. Silvia de los Santos, from AMICIS, Clínica Jurídica and Social Patagónica [AMICIS, Legal and Social Clinic of the Patagonia], the organization representing the alleged victims, filed a brief of pleadings, motions, and evidence (hereinafter, “brief of pleadings and motions”), under the terms of Article 40 of the Rules of Procedure. As of February 18, 2011, Verónica Heredia José Raúl Heredia (hereinafter, “the representatives”) have represented the alleged victims.2 In general, the representatives agreed substantially with the allegations of the Commission. They also requested that the Tribunal declare violations of the rights recognized in the following Articles: 7, 5, 3, 8, and 25 of the American Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) thereof, and the noncompliance with the obligations established in Articles I, II, III, and XI of the Convention on Forced Disappearance of Persons, and 1, 6, and 8 of the Convention Against Torture, to the detriment of Iván Eladio Torres Millacura; Articles 5, 8, and 25 of the American Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) of the Convention, and Articles 1, 6, and 8 of the Convention Against Torture, to the detriment of María Leontina Millacura Llaipén, Fabiola Valeria Torres, Marcos Alejandro Torres Millacura, Evelyn Paola Caba, Ivana Valeria Torres, and Romina Marcela Torres; Articles 7, 5, 8, 25, 3, 2, 4(1), 19, and 26 of the American Convention, with regard to Article 1(1) thereof and of “the Protocol of San Salvador,” Articles 2, 6, and 8 of the Convention Against Torture, and III of the Convention on Forced Disappearance of Persons, to the detriment of Iván Eladio Torres Millacura, María Leontina Millacura Llaipén, Fabiola Valeria Torres, Marcos Alejandro Torres, Evelyn Paola Caba, Ivana Valeria Torres, and Romina Marcela Torres, and 2, in relation to Articles 3, 5, 7, 8, and 25 of the American Convention and 1(1) thereof. Finally, the representatives requested certain reparations and the payment of costs and expenses, and they expressed that the alleged victims wished to access the Victims Legal Aid Fund of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (hereinafter the “Legal Aid Fund”). 6. On January 28, 2011, the State filed its brief answering the application and provided comments on the brief of pleadings and motions (hereinafter “answer to the application”), under the terms of Article 41 of the Rules of Procedure. In that brief, the State acknowledged its international responsibility, expressing “its willingness to accept the conclusions contained in the Report [on the merits] passed by the [...] Commission,” and the “legal consequences derived from it.” In this sense, it noted that it “exclusively [acknowledged] the violations of rights established by the [...] Commission in [its] report [on the merits].” However, the State expressly opposed the Commission’s individualization of the victims in its application, the mention of the provisional measures both by the Commission and the representatives, the arguments regarding specific violations presented by them, the indication of the beneficiaries made by the representatives, and the representatives’ requests for reparations. On August 9, 2010, the State named Eduardo Acevedo Díaz as Head Agent and Alberto Javier Salgado and Andrea G. Gualde as Alternate Agents. 7. On April 6 and 11, 2011, the representative and the Commission presented, respectively, their observations on the State’s acknowledgment of international responsibility in this case, in keeping with Article 62 of the Rules of Procedure. II PROCEEDING BEFORE THE COURT 8. Through an Order dated April 14, 2011, the President of the Court (hereinafter 2 On that date, the Tribunal was informed that the alleged victims had revoked “the authority granted to AMICIS [...]” and therefore, to Silvia de los Santos. 5