9 36. As regards the alleged violation of Article 5 (Right to Humane Treatment) of the American Convention, in the light of Article 2 of the Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture, committed to the detriment of Mr. Santiago GómezPalomino, the Court holds the acknowledgment of responsibility carried out by the State in the answer to the application (supra para. 12) to be valid and rejects, on the grounds of estoppel3 , the denial thereof in the subsequent brief clarifying the answer to the application (supra para. 14). 37. Likewise, the Inter-American Court admits the acknowledgment of international responsibility carried out by the State with respect to the alleged violation of Article 5 (Right to Humane Treatment) of the American Convention, to the detriment of Mrs. Victoria Margarita Palomino-Buitrón and Mrs. Esmila Liliana Conislla-Cárdenas and of the girl Ana María Gómez-Guevara. 38. The Court admits the acknowledgment of international responsibility carried out by the State with respect to the alleged violation of Articles 8(1) (Right to Fair Trial) and 25 (Right to Judicial Protection) of the American Convention, to the detriment of Mr. Santiago Gómez-Palomino and his next of kin, in connection with the events that took place from the date on which Mr. Santiago Gómez-Palomino was arrested up to the transition towards democracy which happened during the year 2000 in Peru (supra para. 30). 39. The Tribunal observes that part of the merits in the instant case is still in dispute. It will therefore address the alleged violations of Articles 5 (Right to Humane Treatment), 8(1) (Right to Fair Trial) and 25 (Right to Judicial Protection) of the American Convention (infra paras. 58 to 68 and 72 to 86), considering the claims of the Inter-American Commission and of the representatives that have not been acknowledged by the State. Likewise, the Court will decide on the alleged breach of Articles 2 of the American Convention and I of the Inter-American Convention on the Forced Disappearance of Persons (infra paras. 90 to 110). On the acknowledgment of the State regarding reparations 40. The Inter-American Commission en its application (supra para. 1) requested the Court to order the State to “carry out a thorough judicial investigation of the facts of the instant case, wherein all those responsible, whether materially or intellectually, be identified and thereupon punished as criminals.” The same claim was advanced by the representatives in their brief of requests and arguments (supra para. 11). 41. On such matter, the State pointed out that the acknowledgment of international responsibility carried out “in no way excludes the civil and criminal liabilities which the authors and accessories of the violations of Mr. Santiago Gómez-Palomino’s rights could have to face [for which reason] it undertakes to perform a complete, unbiased, effective and immediate investigation in order to 3 Cf. Case of the Moiwana Community. Judgment of June 15, 2005. Series C No. 124, para. 58; Case of Huilca-Tecse. Judgment of March 3, 2005. Series C No. 121, para. 56, and Case of Herrera-Ulloa. Judgment of July 2, 2004. Series C No. 107, para. 83.