down a ruling convicting the material authors of the crimes and ordering them to pay civil damages in the amount of 20,000 new soles, to be divided among the victims’ legal heirs. Nevertheless, as of November 18, 1997, that compensation had not been paid. 15. They allege that because the authors of the killing were agents of a State institution, namely the National Police, the State is obligated to assume responsibility for paying the damages owed to the victims’ next of kin. B. The State’s position 16. The State maintains that the Division for Investigating Homicide, Assaults and Healthrelated crimes (DDCV) prepared affidavit N° 281-IC-H-DDCV, dated June 26, 1991, and expanded affidavit N° 192-IC-H-DDCV, dated July 8, 1991, certifying the deaths of the young boys, ages 14 and 17, and indicating that the author was identified as a member of the Peruvian National Police and was incarcerated by order of Callao’s 5th Examining Magistrate. 17. It argues that the authors of the homicide of the Gómez Paquiyauri brothers were identified as police officers. Criminal proceedings were instituted against them in the 5th Criminal Court of the Province of Callao. Callao’s 1st Criminal Chamber handed down a ruling of conviction. 18. The State points out that on November 29, 1993, the Third Criminal Chamber of the Callao Superior Court issued a ruling of second instance that convicted the guilty parties of the crimes charged, and ordered the following sentences: 18 years’ imprisonment for PG Sergeant Second Class Guillermo Paulino Cornejo Zapata and for PG Sergeant Second Class Francisco Antezana Santillán; 15 years for PG Corporal Dámaso Alonso Antezana Liñan; 5 years for SO3 José Angel Infante Quiroz; 6 years for SO3 Angel del Rosario Vásquez Chumo; and 2 years for Captain PG Hodar Hincháustegui, for the crimes of aggravated homicide. It also ordered civil damages of 20,000 new soles for the victims’ next of kin. 19. The State reports that in the hearing held to sentence all those convicted, an appeal was filed to vacate the sentences of incarceration. On October 17, 1994, the Supreme Court’s Criminal Law Transitory Chamber declared that the petition seeking to have the sentences nullified was denied, and upheld the sentence of imprisonment for those convicted. 20. The State reports that through memorandum No. 268-97-IN-CNDDHH/SP, dated May 8, 1997, the Ministry of the Interior reported that the persons convicted of the murder of the young Gómez Paquiyauri brothers had been serving their sentences and that on November 10, 1995, Guillermo Paulino Cornejo Zapata and Francisco Antezano Santillán had been paroled; Dámaso Antezama Liñan was paroled on May 1, 1995 and Angel del Rosario Vásquez Chumo on November 22, 1994. All the paroles were done by order of the proper authorities and pursuant to the provisions of the Sentencing Code. 21. The State asserts that Peru investigated the facts denounced, using the mechanisms of domestic law, which successfully identify, prosecuted and punished the authors and ordered payment of damages to the victims’ next of kin. Payment of those damages must be effected in accordance with the procedures established under the domestic legal system. IV. ANALYSIS 22. The Commission will now examine the requirements for a petition’s admissibility, as established in the American Convention. A. Competence of the Commission ratione materiae, ratione personae andratione temporis 23. The petitioners are authorized to file petitions with the Commission under Article 44 of the American Convention. The alleged victims named in the petition are individual natural persons whose Convention-recognized rights Peru undertook to respect and ensure. With regard to the 3