5 15. On May 16, 2001 the Secretariat gave notice to the Commission and to the representatives of the alleged victims and their next of kin of the brief on preliminary objections, pursuant to Article 36(3) of the Rules of Procedure. On June 12, 2001 the Commission requested a 15-day extension to file its observations on the aforementioned brief. On June 13, the Secretariat, instructed by the President, informed the Commission that the extension had been granted until July 2, 2001, on which date the Commission filed its observations to the brief on preliminary objections. 16. On May 25, 2001 the Secretariat, instructed by the President, informed the State of its right to appoint an ad hoc Judge, in view of the fact that the President accepted the request made by Judge Carlos Vicente de Roux Rengifo, a Colombian citizen, to excuse himself from hearing the instant case, based on Articles 19 of the Statute of the Court and 19 of its Rules of Procedure. On June 27, 2001 the State appointed Mr. Rafael Nieto Navia as ad hoc Judge. 17. On July 6, 2001 the State requested an extension to file the brief replying to the application. On July 9, 2001 the President granted the extension requested until August 6, 2001. 18. On August 6, 2001, the State requested an extension until August 10, 2001 to file the brief replying to the application. That same day, the President granted the extension requested. 19. On August 10, 2001 the State filed its reply to the application. 20. In his April 12, 2002 Order, the President summoned the parties to a public hearing to be held at the seat of the Court on June 11, 2002, to hear the arguments of the State and of the Commission regarding the preliminary objections raised by the former. 21. The public hearing was held at the seat of the Court on the date foreseen. There appeared before the Court: for the State of Colombia: Luz Marina Gil García, Agent; and Mónica Jiménez González. for the Inter-American Commission: Robert K. Goldman, Delegate; Verónica Gómez, Advisor; Gustavo Gallón Giraldo, Assistant; Luz Marina Monzón, Assistant; and Roxanna Althoz, Assistant. V COMPETENCE 22. The Court is competent, under the terms of Article 62(3) of the Convention, to hear the preliminary objection raised by the State in the instant case, because