I INTRODUCTION OF THE CASE AND PURPOSE OF THE DISPUTE 1. The case submitted to the Court. On June 10, 2012, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the Inter-American Commission” or “the Commission”) submitted to the jurisdiction of the Court (hereinafter “submission brief”) the case of “Jeremías Osorio Rivera and others” against and the Republic of Peru (hereinafter “the State” or “Peru”), indicating that: (a) Jeremías Osorio Rivera had been detained by a Peruvian Army patrol in the province of Cajatambo, department of Lima, on April 28, 1991, and subsequently forcibly disappeared in a context of armed conflict, in which enforced disappearance had allegedly been used systematically by members of the State’s armed forces; (b) Jeremías Osorio Rivera had been subject to alleged acts of torture during his transfer by members of the Cajatambo Counter-subversive Base on April 30, 1991; (c) the soldiers had not provided information on his whereabouts and, subsequently, disseminated false information on this, and (d) to date, “more than 20 years after the [presumed] victim’s enforced disappearance, and with the entire truth about the events still not known, the domestic criminal proceedings ha[d] not provided an effective remedy to determine the fate of the [presumed] victim, or to ensure the rights of access to justice and to the truth through the investigation and eventual punishment of those responsible.” 2. Proceedings before the Commission. The proceedings before the Commission were as follows: a) Petition. On November 20, 1997, Porfirio Osorio Rivera and the Asociación Pro Derechos Humanos (APRODEH) lodged the initial petition before the Commission; b) Admissibility Report. On July 12, 2010, the Commission approved Admissibility Report No. 76/10; 1 c) Merits report. On October 31, 2011, the Commission approved Merits report No. 140/11, 2 in accordance with Article 50 of the Convention (hereinafter also “the Merits report” or “Report No. 140/11”), in which it reached a series of conclusions and made recommendations to the State. a. Conclusions. The Commission concluded that the State was responsible for the following violations: i. Of the rights recognized in Articles 3, 4, 5(1), 5(2), 7, 8(1) and 25(1) of the American Convention, in relation to Articles 1(1) and 2 of this international instrument, to the detriment of Jeremías Osorio Rivera; ii. Of Articles l and III of the Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearance of Persons, to the detriment of Jeremías Osorio Rivera, and iii. Of Articles 5(1), 8(1) and 25 of the American Convention in relation to Articles 1(1) and 2 of this instrument, to the detriment of the family members […] named in paragraph 156 of the Merits report. b. Recommendations. Consequently, the Commission made a series of recommendations to the State: i) Conduct a complete, impartial, and effective investigation into the whereabouts of Jeremías Osorio Rivera and, should it be discovered that the 1 In this report, the Commission declared the petition admissible in relation to the presumed violation of Articles 3, 4, 5, 7, 8 and 25 of the American Convention, in connection with Articles 1(1) and 2 of this instrument, and in relation to Articles I and III of the Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearance of Persons. Cf. Admissibility Report No. 76/10, Case of 11,845, Jeremías Osorio Rivera and others, Peru, July 12, 2010 (file of proceedings before the Commission, volume I, folios 7 to 15). 2 Merits Report No. 140/11, Case of 11,845, Jeremías Osorio Rivera and others, Peru, October 31, 2011 (merits file, volume I, folios 7 a 53). 4