4. Brief with motions, arguments and evidence. On July 7, 2012, the representatives submitted their brief with motions, arguments and evidence (hereinafter “motions and arguments brief”) to the Court. The representatives agreed, in substance, with the Commission’s arguments and asked the Court to declare that the State was internationally responsible for the violation of Articles 8, 25, 1(1) and 2 alleged by the Commission; they also asked that the Court declare the violation of Articles 7, 11, 13, 22 and 24 of the Convention, with regard to the presumed victim. 5. Answering brief. On November 12, 2012, the State submitted to the Court its brief with preliminary objections, answering the submission of the case, and with observations on the motions and arguments brief (hereinafter “answering brief”). In addition, the State designated Germán Saltrón Negretti as its Agent. One of the preliminary objections referred to “the lack of impartiality” of certain judges of the Court and its Secretary. 6. On November 23, 2012, the acting President of the Court issued an Order in which, inter alia, he decided that the allegation of lack of impartiality submitted by the State as a preliminary objection was not a preliminary objection and was unfounded. 5 7. Observations on the preliminary objections. On March 5 and 6, 2013, the Commission and the representatives of the presumed victim, respectively, presented their observations on the preliminary objections filed by the State. 8. Public hearing. In an Order of the President of the Court (hereinafter “the President”) of July 31, 2013, the parties were summoned to a public hearing on the case and the testimony to be provided by affidavit or in the oral proceeding was established. 6 The representatives contested this order for several reasons that were rejected by the Court in plenary. 7 The public hearing was held on September 3 and 4, 2013, during the 100th regular session of the Court, which took place at its seat. 8 During this hearing, the Court requested the parties to present certain additional helpful information and documentation. 9. The Court also received 34 amicus curiae briefs presented by: (1) Rubén Hernández Valle, President of the Instituto Costarricense de Derecho Constitucional; (2) the Asociación Dominicana de Derecho Administrativo; 9 (3) Leo Zwaak, Diana Contreras Garduño, Lubomira Kostova, Tomas Königs and Annick Pijnenburg, on behalf of the Netherlands 5 Cf. Case of Brewer Carías v. Venezuela. Order of the acting President of the Inter-American Court, Judge Alberto Pérez Pérez, of November 23, 2012. Available at: http://www.corteidh.or.cr/docs/asuntos/brewer_23_11_12.pdf 6 Cf. Case of Brewer Carías v. Venezuela. Order of the President of the Inter-American Court of July 31, 2013. Available at: http://www.corteidh.or.cr/docs/asuntos/brewer_31_07_13.pdf. 7 Cf. Case of Brewer Carías v. Venezuela. Order of the Inter-American Court of August 20, 2013. Available at: http://www.corteidh.or.cr/docs/asuntos/brewer_20_08_13.pdf 8 There appeared at this hearing: (a) for the Inter-American Commission: Felipe González, Commissioner, and Silvia Serrano Guzmán, Adviser; (b) for the representatives of the presumed victim: Pedro Nikken, Héctor Faúndez Ledesma, Juan E. Méndez, Douglas Cassel and Claudio Grossman, representatives, and Claudia Nikken García and Caterina Balasso Tejera, legal advisers, and (c) for the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela: Germán Saltrón Negretti, Agent of the State for Human Rights; Manuel Galindo, Attorney General of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela; Branggela Betancourt, Coordinator of Criminal Matters of the Office of the Attorney General; Luis Britto García, External Adviser of the State Human Rights Agency; María Alejandra Díaz, External Adviser of the State Human Rights Agency; Manuel García, lawyer of the State Human Rights Agency, and Elbana Bellorín, Internationalist. 9 The brief was signed by Olivo A. Rodríguez Huertas, President of the Asociación Dominicana de Derecho Administrativo. 5