6 3. The Court is not competent to make any declaration on the legal validity of the Government of Peru’s decision to withdraw from its contentious jurisdiction. The withdrawal of the recognition of the contentious jurisdiction of the Court is a freely taken, unilateral decision of the State of Peru that does not allow any interpretation or qualification. 4. In the light of the previous arguments and, since the State of Peru is not subject to the contentious jurisdiction of the Court in the cases referred to [in] Note CDH/S-1014, we do not consider this to be a notification, since the State of Peru is not a party to the said proceedings. [...] 23. On August 29 and September 6, 2000, the Secretariat requested the Commission to forward the list of witnesses and experts that it would offer during the public hearing on the merits of the case. On September 11, 2000, the Commission submitted the list. 24. By an Order of September 13, 2000, the President of the Court (hereinafter “the President”) convened the Inter-American Commission and the State to a public hearing to be held at the seat of the Court on November 22, 2000, in order to receive the statements of the witnesses and the experts offered by the Commission and also the final oral arguments of the parties on the merits of the case. The same day, the Secretariat sent the Commission the summonses for the witnesses who were convened. On October 19, 2000, the Commission transmitted three notification records and advised that the records concerning the presence of the four other witnesses “w[ould] be sent as soon as [they had been] received.” On October 20 and 30 and November 1, 2000, the witnesses Díez Canseco Cisneros, Revoredo Marsano, Bernales Ballesteros and Díaz Valverde, respectively confirmed that they would attend the public hearing. 25. On November 22, 2000, the Court held the public hearing on merits and received the statements of the witness and the experts proposed by the Commission on the facts that are the subject of the application. The Court also heard the Commission’s final oral arguments on merits. There appeared before the Court: For the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights: Hélio Bicudo, delegate Carlos Ayala Corao, delegate Christina Cerna, adviser Lourdes Flores Nano, adviser, and Manuel Aguirre Roca, assistant; witness proposed by the Commission: Delia Revoredo Marsano; experts proposed by the Commission: Jorge Avendaño Valdéz, and Mario Pasco Cosmópolis.