8 40. The Inter-American Press Association presented an amicus curiae brief on March 10, 2004. 41. The Colegio de Periodistas de Costa Rica submitted an amicus curiae brief on March 11, 2004. 42. On March 11, 2004, the Inter-American Commission sent the testimony of Mrs. Laura Mariela González Picado, given in an affidavit sworn in the presence of a public civil servant (supra para. 37). 43. On March 16, 2004, the Secretariat sent the State and the alleged victims’ representatives the statement that Mrs. Laura Mariela González Picado made in the presence of a public civil servant, so that they might present whatever observations they deemed pertinent. 44. On March 30, 2004, the alleged victims’ representatives advised the Court that they were withdrawing their offer of Mr. Julio Maier as an expert witness, as he was unable to provide an expert report in the form of an affidavit. 45. On March 30, 2004, Article 19, Global Campaign For Free Expression, filed an amicus curiae brief. 46. Because Mr. Julio Maier was unable to give his expert report in the form of an affidavit given before a public civil servant, on April 7, 2004 the alleged victims’ representatives petitioned the Court to permit Mr. Carlos Tiffer Sotomayor, whom the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights had offered as an expert witness, to expand his report to address as well the subject matter about which the expert originally proposed by the alleged victims’ representatives, Mr. Julio Maier, was to have testified. 47. On April 19, 2004, the Center for Justice and International Law (CEJIL) presented an amicus curiae brief. 48. On April 22, 2004, the President of the Court issued an order wherein he broadened the content of the opinion to be given by Mr. Carlos Tiffer Sotomayor, the expert offered jointly by the Inter-American Commission and the alleged victims’ representatives to appear in a public hearing before the Court. 49. On April 26, 2004, the World Press Freedom Committee filed an amicus curiae brief. 50. On April 30 and May 1, 2004, the Court held a public hearing where it received the testimony of the witnesses and expert witnesses offered by the InterAmerican Commission, by the alleged victims’ representatives and by the State on the preliminary objections and possible merits, reparations and costs. It also heard the parties’ final oral arguments. There appeared: for the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights: