II. PROCESSING BY THE COMMISSION 6. On March 9, 1995, the IACHR received a complaint lodged by María Esther Gomero Cuentas de Vásquez, the wife of the alleged victim. On April 7 of that same year it received a petition signed by the wife and by the Asociación Pro Derechos Humanos (APRODEH). In both documents it is alleged that Mr. Jorge Vásquez Durand, a Peruvian merchant, 3had been detained by Ecuadorian State agents, since when his whereabouts were unknown. 7. On April 25, 1995, the IACHR forwarded the pertinent parts of the petition to the State of Ecuador and requested its observations. On the same date, it advised the petitioners that initial processing had begun and requested further information from them. Both the petitioners and the State presented information on May 22, 1995. 8. On June 1, 1995, the IACHR asked the Ecuadorian State to adopt precautionary measures designed to investigate the whereabouts and protect the life and personal integrity of Mr. Vásquez. On July 6, 1995, the State presented information which was forwarded [to the petitioners] on July 10. On September 25, 1995, the IACHR received observations from the petitioners, which were forwarded to Ecuador on October 31, 1995, with a request for information. On that same date, the IACHR also asked the petitioners for information. The State and the petitioners presented information on November 28 and 29, 1995, respectively. 9. On November 30, 1995, the IACHR reiterated its concern to the State regarding the situation of Mr. Vásquez as well as its request that the precautionary measures be adopted. On December 28, 1995, the Ecuadorian State provided information, which was forwarded on February 1, 1996. The petitioners replied on February 14, 1996 and their reply was forwarded [to the State] on February 23. On March 11, 1996, the petitioners submitted their observations. On April 2, 1996, the IACHR forwarded the petitioners' observations to the State and asked it to report on implementation of the precautionary measures requested. 10. On August 23, 1996, the IACHR told the petitioners that it was interested in convening a hearing during its 93rd regular session. On September 5, 1996, the petitioners provided information and on September 9 the IACHR convened the parties to a hearing to be held on October 10, 1996. On October 7, 1996, the petitioners sent the IACHR a summary of the case for the purposes of the hearing. On October 10, 1996, the hearing was canceled because the petitioners did not show up. 11. On December 11, 2001, the IACHR asked the petitioners for information and told them that if it was not received within 30 days, the IACHR might suspend its hearing of the case. On January 21, 2002, the petitioners repeated information already provided and asked that a friendly settlement procedure be started. On February 27, 2001, the petitioners' observations were passed on to the State. 12. On April 8 2002, the Commission informed the petitioners that, pursuant to Article 37.3 of the Rules of Procedure then in force, it had decided to defer its treatment of admissibility until the debate and decision on the merits. On June 6, 2003, the petitioners presented their additional observations on the merits. On July 7, 2003, the IACHR informed the State that, pursuant to Article 37.3 of its Rules of Procedure, it had decided to defer its treatment of admissibility until the debate and decision on the merits and it forwarded to the State the petitioners' observations on the merits. 3 During the processing of the case by the IACHR, the Permanent Mission of Peru to the OAS presented information. Because of the special circumstances surrounding the alleged facts of the case, in the early stages of its processing by the IACHR, the Commission requested information from the Peruvian State with a view to clarifying certain aspects, but without initiating a petition against that State. Thus, on May 12, 1995, the Peruvian State submitted a list of Peruvian citizens detained in Ecuador, whose release it was negotiating. That list included the name of the alleged victim in this case. On June 1, 1995, the IACHR asked the State of Peru to supplement the information provided and to adopt certain measures to investigate the whereabouts of Mr. Vásquez. On July 10, 1995 and November 3, 1995, the IACHR reiterated its request to the State of Peru to adopt special measures. On November 15, 1995, the Peruvian State remitted documents referring to Mr. Vásquez's situation and the IACHR acknowledged receipt of them on December 1, 1995. 2