situations that began to be executed prior to March 11, 1990 (when the first democratic Government after the military regime took office)” and argued that the facts of this case took place precisely when the temporal limitation was in force. The State designated Miguel Ángel González Morales as its Agent, and Luis Petit-Laurent Baldrich and Jorge Castro Pereira as Deputy Agents. 8. Observations on the preliminary objection. On May 17 and 18, 2012, the Commission and the representatives, respectively, presented their observations on the preliminary objection filed by the State. 9. Summoning of a public hearing. By an Order of February 14, 2013, 5 the President of the Court ordered that various statements be received in this case. In addition, he convened the parties to a public hearing that was held on March 20 and 21, 2013, during the Court’s forty-seventh special session, which took place in Medellín, Colombia. 6 10. Questions posed to the parties during the public hearing. In a communication of March 26, 2013, the Secretariat, on the instructions of the Court in plenary, clarified to the parties and the Commission the questions posed by the judges of the Court during the public hearing, so that they would answer them in their final written arguments or observations, respectively. In addition, the State was required to present specific documentation as useful evidence, to be submitted with its final written arguments. 7 11. Amici curiae. The Court received three amici curiae briefs presented by: (1) David James Cantor, Director of the Refugee Law Initiative (RLI) of the School of Advanced Study, University of London; (2) Nimisha Patel, of the School of Psychology, University of East London, and (3) Víctor Rosas Vergara, lawyer and Vice President of the NGO, Unión de Ex Prisioneros Políticos de Chile (UNExPP). 12. Final written arguments and observations. On April 21, 2013, the representatives and the State forwarded their final written arguments and the Inter-American Commission presented its final written observations in this case. Moreover, on that occasion, the representatives, the State, and the Commission answered the questions posed by the judges. In addition, the State presented most of the documentation relating to useful evidence requested by the Court. 13. Observations of the representatives and the State. The brief with final written arguments and observations were forwarded to the parties and to the Inter-American Commission on May 7, 2013. The President granted the representatives, the State, and the Commission until May 17, 2013, at the latest, to present any observations they considered pertinent on the documents attached to these final arguments. May 17, 2013, the 5 Cf. Case of García Lucero et al. v. Chile. Order of President of the Court of February 14, 2013. Available at: www.corteidh.or.cr/docs/asuntos/garcíalucero_14_02_13.pdf. 6 The following persons appeared at this hearing: (a) for the Inter-American Commission: Silvia Serrano Guzmán, legal adviser; (b) for the representatives: Lorna McGregor, Juan Pablo Delgado, Clara Sandoval, the presumed victim Elena García and the presumed victims’ psychologist Cristian Peña, and (c) for the State: Miguel Ángel González Morales, Agent, and Jorge Castro Pereira, Deputy Agent. 7 Namely: (a) “copy of the substantive and procedural norms that regulate the investigation underway into the acts allegedly suffered by Mr. García Lucero, including those that criminalize the offenses that are being investigated, and those referring to the possibility of filing a civil action during the criminal proceedings; (b) copy of the norms relating to the “finance proceeding” (finance proceeding) and any others related to the possibility of claiming from the State or from private individuals, pecuniary compensation or any other type of measure of reparation for acts such as those that the representatives allege that Mr. García Lucero suffered; (c) a complete and updated copy of the actions taken during the investigation of the acts allegedly suffered by Mr. García Lucero.” 7