-14Commission] on October 28, 2005, and that had been sent as an appendix to the final written Arguments by the Inter-American Commission.” 80. On November 18, 2005, the Commission sent a statement dated October 24, 2005 and appendixes thereto, that had been filed before the Commission by Sara Vásquez-Rodríguez, Calixta Sánchez-Cabello, Yolanda Alata de Cabezas y Maximiliana Carrillo-Palacios, all of them alleged victims in relation to the instant case. 81. On November 18, 2005, the Commission forwarded a dated October 24, 2005, and appendixes thereto that had Commission by Sara Vásquez-Rodríguez, Yolanda Alata de Carrillo-Palacios and Calixto F. Sánchez-Cabello, “in relation to copy of the statement been filed before the Cabezas, Maximiliano the instant case.” 82. On November 23, 2005, the common intervener submitted the documentary evidence and appendixes to its final written arguments (supra para. 72.) 83 On November 23, 2005, Peru filed a brief requesting the Court “to set aside the final written Arguments by the common intervener” of the representatives of the alleged victims, alleging that the failure to submit the appendixes to such final written argument “placed Peru in a situation of a virtual impossibility to examine the said final written arguments and to submit elementary considerations within the term that had been set for such purpose.” 84. On November 24, 2005, the Commission sent a statement and its appendixes that had been filed before it by Cristina Rojas-Poccorpachi and its respective appendixes. 85. On November 29, 2005, the Secretariat, following instructions of the President, notified the parties that due to the time elapsed from the filing by the common intervener of his final arguments until the filing of the appendixes thereto (supra paras. 72 and 82,) the Court decided to extend the term up to December 12, 2005 to grant an extended term for the Commission and the State to file any comments they deemed fit to the clarifications, explanations and documentary evidence that the other parties had filed in compliance with the order issued by the Court after the final oral arguments at the public hearing and by means of notes of October 14, 2005, as well as the documents submitted as an appendix to the final written arguments. 86. On November 29, 2005, the State filed a brief containing a petition addressed to the Court to issue a new request to the Commission and the common intervener for a detailed analysis of the alleged victims, since it considered that the information that had been submitted did not comply with the request that the Court had made (supra paras. 69, 72 and 74.) 87. On November 29, 2005, the State filed another brief requesting again that the Court might call upon the evidence relating to the state,emts of Matilde PinchiPinchi and María Angélica Arce (supra para. 45.) The Secretariat notified the parties that, as regards to the requests regarding evidence filed by the State, such request would be informed to the Court; to the pertinent effects, and following the instructions of the President of the Court, the Secretariat further informed the State that the Court would request the submission of such documentary evidence only if it