5 9. The Commission designated Robert K. Goldman, Carlos M. Ayala Corao and Germán J. Bidart Campos as delegates, and Raquel Poitevien and Hernando Valencia Villa as advisors. The Commission also accredited Susana Albanese, Viviana Krsticevic, María Claudia Pulido, Emilio Weinschelbaum, Martín Abregú and Ariel Dulitzky as assistants. 10. On April 16, 1999, after the President of the Court (hereinafter “the President”) had completed a preliminary review of the application, the Secretariat of the Court (hereinafter “the Secretariat”) forwarded it to the State and to the alleged victim. 11. On May 19, 1999, Argentina designated Ambassador María Matilde Lorenzo Alcalá de Martinsen as agent in this case, and Luis Ugarte as alternate agent. On March 31, 2000, Argentina revoked its designations and named Ernesto Alberto Marcer as agent in the case and Ambassador Leandro Despouy as alternate agent. Argentina replaced its agents again on May 24, 2001, this time designating Mrs. Andrea G. Gualde as agent and Ms. María Rosa Cilurzo as alternate agent. On June 6, 2002, the State advised that it was making a change in its representation, and that M. Luz Monglia was being designated as its new alternate agent. 12. On May 19, 1999, Argentina named Mr. Julio A. Barberis as judge ad hoc. 13. On August 17, 1999, the Secretariat of the Court received the State’s answer to the application. 14. On November 29, 1999 and April 6, 2000, the Inter-American Commission and Argentina, respectively, entered additional written pleadings on the merits of the case, having been so authorized by the President of the Court. 15. On September 7, 2001, the Court delivered a judgment on preliminary objections and resolved to continue hearing and processing the present case, as it did not accept the first preliminary objection based on Article 1(2) of the American Convention and did partially accept the second preliminary objection of lack of jurisdiction based on Argentina’s terms of ratification of the Convention, and its acceptance of the Court’s contentious jurisdiction. 16. On December 14, 2001, the Court granted the Commission a period of one month, not subject to extension, to present its arguments and proofs apropos possible reparations in the case. The Court also asked the Commission to inform the representatives of the alleged victim that they could tender, by way of the Commission, any reparations-related arguments and evidence they might have. On January 9, 2002, the representatives of the alleged victims presented their arguments and evidences on reparations in the present case. They also reported that the same document had been sent to the Commission to comply with the Court’s request of December 14, 2001. 17. On January 14, 2001, the Inter-American Commission submitted its pleadings on reparations in the instant case. It also submitted the reparations brief prepared by the alleged victim’s representatives, which had been sent to the Court earlier (supra 16).