5 In this regard, the Commission recommended that the State: 1. Conduct a complete, impartial and effective investigation to establish the whereabouts of Ernestina and Erlinda Serrano Cruz and, should they be found, provide satisfactory reparation for the human rights violations […] established, including reestablishing their right to a name and making all necessary efforts to ensure the family reunion. 2. Conduct a complete, impartial and effective investigation to establish the responsibility of all the authors of the human rights violations to the detriment of Ernestina and Erlinda Serrano Cruz and their next of kin. 3. Make adequate reparation to the next of kin of Ernestina and Erlinda Serrano Cruz for the human rights violations [...]established. 13. On March 14, 2003, the Commission forwarded this report to the State, granting it two months from the date of its transmittal, to report on “the measures adopted to comply with the recommendations.” The State had not sent its answer when this time expired. 14. On June 4, 2003, “owing to the State’s failure to comply with the recommendations,” the Commission decided to file the case before the Court. 15. On July 3, 2003, two days after the Court notified the State of the application filed by the Commission (infra para. 19), the State sent the latter its answer to Report No. 37/03 (supra paras. 12 and 13). IV PROCEEDING BEFORE THE COURT 16. On June 14, 2003, the Inter-American Commission filed an application before the Court (supra para. 1). 17. The Commission appointed Juan Méndez and Santiago A. Canton as its delegates to the Court, and Mario López-Garelli and Ariel Dulitzky as legal advisors, in accordance with Article 22 of the Rules of Procedure.2 Also, pursuant to Article 33 of the Rules of Procedure, the Commission provided the names and addresses of the alleged victims and their next of kin and advised that they would be represented by CEJIL and the Asociación Pro-Búsqueda (hereinafter “the representatives of the alleged victims and their next of kin” or “the representatives”). 18. On June 24, 2004, the Commission forwarded a communication indicating a sole address for the representatives of the alleged victims and their next of kin. 19. On July 2, 2003, after the President of the Court (hereinafter “the President”) had made a preliminary review of the application, the Secretariat of the Court (hereinafter “the Secretariat”) notified it to the State, together with its appendixes, informing the State of the time limits for answering the application and appointing its representatives for the proceeding. In addition, on the instructions of the President, the Secretariat informed the State that it had the right to appoint a judge ad hoc to take part in the consideration of the case. 2 The Commission changed its representatives while the case was being processed.