7 facts of the instant case had been imprisoned and/or was in prison and, in the latter case, if they were being held in custody pending trial or because they have been convicted during the said proceedings. The parties presented information in this regard on August 14, 2006. The State had submitted some information on August 8, 2006. 24. On August 14 and 17, 2006, the Commission and the representatives, respectively, forwarded the sworn statements of María Magdalena Galeano and Rosa Mujica Giménez, alleged next of kin of Benjamín Ramírez and Augustín Goiburú, respectively. On the instructions of the President, the Secretariat informed the State and the representatives that if they had any comments on these statements they should forward them by August 28, 2006, at the latest. The parties did not submit any comments (infra paras. 56 to 59). V PRIOR CONSIDERATIONS 25. In its application, the Inter-American Commission listed the four alleged victims of the facts of this case and twelve of their next of kin: Agustín Goiburú Giménez, Carlos José Mancuello Bareiro, Rodolfo Ramírez Villalba, Benjamín Ramírez Villalba, Elva Elisa Benítez Feliú de Goiburú, Rogelio Agustín Goiburú Benítez, Rolando Agustín Goiburú Benítez, Patricia Jazmín Goiburú Benítez, Gladis Ester Ríos de Mancuello, Claudia Anahí Mancuello Ríos, Carlos Marcelo Mancuello Ríos, Ana Arminda Bareiro de Mancuello, Sotera Ramírez de Arce, Sara Diodora Ramírez Villalba, Herminio Arnoldo Ramírez Villalba and Julio Darío Ramírez Villalba. In its Admissibility and Merits Report, the Inter-American Commission had mentioned the four alleged victims, but did not name their next of kin, merely referring to them in general. Also, in its application, the Commission advised the Court that the petitioners had forwarded information on the nephews and nieces of the Ramírez Villalba brothers, children of Julio Darío Ramírez Villalba: Mirtha Hayde Ramírez de Morinigo, Ana María Ramírez de Mellone, Julio César Ramírez Vásquez, Rubén Darío Ramírez Vásquez and Héctor Daniel, all of them Ramírez Vásquez. In this regard, it requested that “they be considered beneficiaries, if it is proved that they are injured parties,” without specifying who this referred to. 26. In its final arguments, based on the sworn statements made by the alleged victims’ next of kin, the Commission included eleven persons who were also next of kin and consequently alleged victims and possible beneficiaries of reparations, who had not been included in the original list presented in the application. In this regard, it stated that “it has been proved before the Court that additional persons to those […] mentioned and with a similar relationship were alive at the time of the disappearance of the [alleged] victims and have, in turn, been [alleged] victims of the violations that have been established.” It also reiterated its request regarding the children of Julio Darío Ramírez Villalba (supra para. 25). 27. In their final arguments brief, the representatives indicated that the alleged victims were the four individuals and their twelve next of kin that the Commission had mentioned in its application. In addition, it asked the Court to order the State to take “measures to find María Magdalena Galeano (former companion of Benjamín Ramírez Villalba), compensate her and provide her with medical and psychological care.” Furthermore, regarding determination of the beneficiaries of the compensation