5 26. On December 11, 1991, the Court formed a special committee to determine the procedure for examination of the evidence and authorized the President to convoke the parties to a private meeting on January 17 and 18, 1992. 27. As a consequence of the preceding and by Resolution of January 18, 1992, the President summoned the parties to a public hearing to be held on June 30, 1992, in order to hear the allegations of the Government and the comments of the Commission concerning the opposition of the Government to the appearance of some of the witnesses offered by the Commission. The President also resolved that, in case the Court deem it pertinent, the testimonies of the Commission's witnesses and experts would be received in a public hearing on July 1, 1992 and that the Commission should submit the resumes and opinions of said experts before March 2, 1992. He further requested the Government to submit a copy of certain documents and to adopt the measures necessary to ensure that the bodies of the inmates who died at "El Frontón" not be moved from the cemeteries where they were buried. 28. On February 12, 1992, the Government asked the Court to modify the President's Resolution. It also requested that the dates for the hearings be maintained to resolve the issue of the disqualification of witnesses. It further requested that the hearing for the delivery of its allegations and the Commission's comments not be made public. The Court denied this request on June 29, 1992, as it felt that no exceptional circumstances, such as those referred to in Article 14 of the Rules of Procedure, were present in this case. 29. The Commission requested a 30-day extension for submitting its experts' resumes and opinions in compliance with the President's resolution. The Government objected. 30. On March 24, 1992, the President partially modified his January 18, 1992, Resolution and resolved that, if found pertinent after the hearing, the Court would opportunely summon the witnesses and experts offered by the Commission to deliver their testimonies. By note of that same date, the President denied the application for extension to which the preceding paragraph refers "in view of the fact that the Commission has had the opportunity and the time necessary to submit said information by the deadline set, and that, by their very nature, judicial deadlines must be met except for exceptional causes which are not found in this case." 31. On April 9, 1992, the Commission applied for reconsideration against the preceding decision and submitted the resumes and expert opinions of Enrique Bernardo, Guillermo Tamayo, Robert H. Kirschner and Clyde C. Snow. By note of April 30, 1992, the Government requested that the documents be returned to the Commission as their submission was improper and would avoid compliance with the March 24 decision. 32. By Resolution of July 1, 1992, the Court confirmed the President's decision not to grant the 30-day extension requested by the Commission; instructed that the resumes and expert opinions submitted be maintained in the case file to be examined in due time; and authorized the President to resolve, subject to prior consultation with the Permanent Commission, whether to admit the statements of the experts offered by the Commission. 33. By note of July 3, 1992, the Government requested the annulment of the preceding decision, which request the President rejected for being notoriously improper. 34. During the 21º Regular Session of the General Assembly of the Organization of American States (hereinafter "the OAS"), the State Parties in the Convention elected Dr. Alejandro MontielArgüello, Dr. Máximo Pacheco-Gómez, and Dr. Hernán Salgado-Pesantes as new judges of the Court and reelected Judge Héctor Fix-Zamudio. On June 29, 1992, the Court, with its new membership having been designated as of January 1, 1992, and in consideration of Judge ad hoc

Select target paragraph3