8 and he appeared as a witness at the public hearing held regarding the instant case, (supra para. 26), where the State made its admission and presented its public apology to Gavidia for the events that are analyzed in this Judgment (infra para 42). Therefore, the Court shall consider him as a next of kin of the aforesaid alleged victim (infra para 60(26)(29)). 35. On the other hand, the Court notices that the representatives did not submit all the evidence to facilitate the adjudication of the case as requested by the Court (supra para. 28). Therefore, there is not full evidence of the family relationship of the following next of kin of the alleged victims: a) Wladimir Martínez and Belkys Martínez, next of kin of Alexis Antonio Martínez-Liébano. b) Envidia2, next of kin of Edgar José Peña-Marín. c) Yolanda Andrea Gallardo, next of kin of Juan Carlos Saavedra-Rincón. d) Alexis Pérez, José Gregorio Pérez and Yomaris, next of kin of Wilcon Alberto Pérez-Santoya. e) Maritza Rojas, Mireya del Carmen and Franlis Marilis, next of kin of Franklin Armas-González. f) Silvia Elena, next of kin of Leonel Chirinos-Hernández. g) Tiburcio Ayala-Gualdron and Yelitza Figueroa, next of kin of José León Ayala-Gualdron. 36. In this aspect, the Court takes into account that such persons were mentioned by the representatives in their brief of requests and arguments, before the State filed its answer to the application and admission, that is to say, they were included in such admission. Consequently, this Court shall consider them as next of kin of the alleged victims (infra paras. 60(26)(1), 60(26)(9), 60(26)(25), 60(26)(36); 60(26)(11), 60(26)(13) and 60(26)(22).) IV ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF INTERNATIONAL RESPONSIBILITY 37. The Court shall address now the acknowledgment responsibility made by the State (supra para. 26). 38. of international Article 53(2) of the Rules of Procedure provides as follows: If the respondent informs the Court of its acquiescence to the claims of the party that has brought the case as well as to the claims of the representatives of the alleged victims, their next of kin or representatives, the Court, after hearing the opinions of the other parties to the case, shall decide whether such acquiescence and its juridical effects are acceptable. In that event, the Court shall determine the appropriate reparations and indemnities. 2 According to the brief of requests, arguments and evidence, this person is referred to as Envidia and in a brief submitting evidence to facilitate the adjudication of the case, she is referred to as Eneida (record of proceedings on the merits, reparations and costs, Volume III, folio 982.)