4 jurisdiction of the [...] Court.” On January 13, 2006 the State requested an extension of the term set to inform the Commission of the measures adopted in compliance with its recommendations, which was granted until January 29, 2006. On January 30 of that same year the Peruvian State filed its report on compliance. 13. On January 30, 2006 upon the possible submission of the case to the Inter-American Court, the Commission requested the petitioners to appoint a common intervener who, pursuant to Article 23(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court “shall be the only person authorized to present pleadings, motions, and evidence during the proceedings, including the public hearings.” On February 3, 7, and 10, 2006 CEJIL and APRODEH forwarded communications wherein information regarding the beneficiaries and their powers of attorney were included, and a common intervener was designated respectively. 14. On February 10, 2006, the Inter-American Commission decided to submit the instant case to the contentious jurisdiction of the Court, “in view of the failure [of the State] to satisfactorily implement” the recommendations contained in Report No. 95/05.” IV PROCEEDING BEFORE THE COURT 15. On February 14, 2006, the Inter-American Commission filed an application before the Court (supra para. 1), attaching documentary evidence thereto and offering to submit testimonial and expert evidence as well. The Commission appointed Clare K. Roberts, Commissioner and Santiago A. Canton, Executive Secretary, as delegates; and Víctor Madrigal-Borloz and Elizabeth Abi-Mershed, Dominique Milá, and Lilly Ching as legal counsels. 16. On March 17, 2006 the Secretariat of the Court (hereinafter “the Secretariat”), once the application had been examined by the President of the Court (hereinafter “the President”), served notice of said application and appendixes thereto upon the State, which was also notified of the term within which it was to answer the application and appoint its agents in the proceedings. 17. On that same date, pursuant to the provisions of Article 35(1)(d) and (e) of the Rules of Procedure, the Secretariat served the application upon the organizations appointed as representatives of the alleged victims’ next of kin, APRODEH, CEAPAZ, and the Centro por la Justicia y el Derecho Internacional (Center for Justice and International Law) (hereinafter “the representatives”), and informed them that a term of two months had been set for them to file their brief containing the requests, arguments, and evidence (hereinafter “brief of requests and arguments”). 18. On March 31, 2006 the Secretariat served notice upon the State that, pursuant to the provisions of Article 10 of the Statute of the Court and Article 18 of its Rules of Procedure, it was entitled to appoint a judge ad hoc to take part in the consideration of the case within thirty days of the date of such notice. 19. On April 21, 2006 the State appointed Iván Arturo Bazán-Chacón as Agent. 20. On April 28, 2006 the State appointed Fernando Vidal-Ramírez as judge ad hoc.