possible and at the public hearing, listen to those alleged victims, witnesses and expert witnesses whose direct statements are truly indispensable, taking into account the circumstances of the case and the object of the testimonies and expert opinions. D.1) Statements and expert opinions to be rendered through affidavit 24. Bearing in mind the terms stipulated in article 50.1 of the Rules of Procedure, what was indicated by the parties, the object of the statements offered, as well as the principle of procedural economy, the Presidency deems convenient to receive, by means of statements rendered through affidavit, the expert opinion of Ernesto Villanueva Villanueva, offered by the Commission; the expert opinions of Carlos Castresana Fernández; Carlos Martin Beristain; Bernardo R. Morales Figueroa; Silvio René Gramajo Valdés and Alejandro Valencia Villa, the testimony of Fredy Peccerelli and the statements of Ismael Salanic, Natalia Gálvez, Carla Alvarado and Froilana Armira, all of them proposed by the representatives, as well as the testimony of Marco Tulio Alvarez Bobadilla, proposed by the State. The President emphasizes that article 50.5 of the Court’s Rules of Procedure contemplates the possibility for the alleged victims or their representatives and the respondent State of formulating questions in writing for the declarants convened to render their statement through affidavits. 25. Pursuant to the terms of the regulatory provision so mentioned, the President proceeds to give the State and the representatives an opportunity to present, if they wish so, the questions they deem pertinent for the declarants of the opposing party referred to in the above paragraph. Upon rendering their statements through affidavits, the expert witnesses, witnesses and alleged victims must respond to such questions, unless the President decides otherwise. The corresponding time limits shall be stipulated in operative paragraph two of this Order. The expert opinions, testimonies and statement before mentioned shall be transmitted to the Commission, the representatives and the State. In turn, the State and the representatives may present the observations they deem pertinent within the time limit indicated in this Order (infra operative paragraph 4). The evidentiary value of said statements shall be determined in time fashion by the Tribunal , which will consider the points of view, if applicable, expressed by the representatives and the State in the exercise of their right to defense. D.2) Statements and expert opinions to be received at the hearing 26. The proceedings in the instant case are set for the oral trial to start as to the merits, reparations and legal costs, for which the Presidency deems pertinent to convene a public hearing in order to receive the statements of alleged victims Wendy Santizo Méndez and Efraín García and the expert opinion of Katherine Temple Doyle, proposed by the representatives, as well as the testimony of Manuel Giovanni Vásquez Vicente, proposed by the State. E. Final oral and written arguments and observations 27. Once the statements and expert opinions have been rendered, the representatives and the State may respectively present before the Tribunal their final oral arguments regarding the merits and possible reparations and legal costs in the instant case. As established in article 51.8 of the Rules of Procedure, once the oral arguments have concluded, the Commission shall present its final observations. 28. According to article 56 of the Rules of Procedure, the alleged victims or their representatives, the State and the Commission may present their final written 8