18. As to the expert opinion offered by Michael Reed Hurtado (supra Considering paragraph 14), the Commission indicated that it will offer “specific elements that will allow the Court to consolidate its case law on the subject of amnesty following the cases of Barrios Altos v. Peru, Almonacid Arellano v. Chile, Gelman v. Uruguay and Gomes Lund v. Brazil. The expert witness will offer the Court information on the amnesty law in El Salvador and will analyze its content in light of international standards on the matter. The specificities of El Salvador’s Amnesty Law relate to different aspects, including the scope and effects of subsequent judicial decisions. The expert witness will also define the elements to be taken into consideration in determining the reparations related to the duty to investigate and the amnesty laws, bearing in mind any new aspects on this matter that arise in the instant case. All these elements will contribute to the development of case law on matters of impunity and transitional justice, with an impact on the Inter-American public order.” 19. The object of the proposed expert opinion, as stated by the Commission supra, specifically refers to the background, scope and effects of the General Amnesty Law for the Consolidation of Peace in El Salvador, an object that is limited to the specific situation in that country. From the information provided, it is not clear that the object of that expert opinion concerns the Inter-American public order, and therefore it is not appropriate to admit the expert opinion of Michael Reed Hurtado offered by the Inter-American Commission, based on its impact on the Inter-American public order. 20. Regarding the proposed expert opinion of Tal Linda Ileen Simmons (supra Considering paragraph 14), the Commission indicated that she will provide the Court with “information on technical questions whose observance has implications for the investigation of serious human rights violations and the possibilities of obtaining justice and reparation. In the present case, the exhumations were conducted at different times and over a prolonged period. This technical information will enable the Court to determine whether the procedures carried out comply with the relevant international standards and, consequently, to define general parameters on the State’s obligations in the context of the exhumation procedure in cases such as this.” 21. In this regard, the President considers that the evidence proposed on this matter can serve to strengthen the protection of the Inter-American Human Rights System, by establishing general parameters on the State’s obligations in the context of the exhumation procedure, which transcend the particular interests of the parties in a specific process, involving all its members, so that it produces a significant effect on the Inter-American public order of human rights. 22. For the foregoing reasons, the President considers it appropriate that the Court receive the expert opinion of Mrs. Tal Linda Ileen Simmons. Likewise, he emphasizes that no objection to this evidence was raised by the other parties. The value of this expert opinion shall be considered in due course, within the context of the existing body of evidence and according to the rules of sound judgment. The object and means by which this expert opinion shall be received is specified in the operative part of this Order (infra operative paragraph 1). d) Means by which the statements and expert reports shall be received and request by the Inter-American Commission to formulate questions to the expert witnesses offered by the representatives 23. It is necessary to ensure the broadest possible presentation of the facts and arguments by the parties, insofar as these are pertinent to the settlement of controversial 7