6 take the necessary steps for the said sworn statements to be made, and to forward them to the Inter-American Court, by May 22, 2003, at the latest. The President also told the Secretariat that, when the sworn written statements had been received and in accordance with the right of defense and the adversary proceeding, they should be forwarded to the State to enable it to present any comments it deemed pertinent within a non-extendible period of 20 days from the date they were received. 30. On April 30, 2003, the State presented a brief, in which it requested that: The scope of the right to an adversary proceeding recognized to the State in the Order of April 22, should be reconsidered. Accordingly, when taking measures to obtain the sworn statements, the Commission should be ordered to inform [the State] of the day, time and address of the office of the judicial official or notary where the witnesses will testify, so that it could assist and be able to cross-examine them […]. And that: Since, [the State] would already be fully informed about the testimonial statements when [the Court] received them, it would not be necessary to forward them. Thus, the 20 days that [the State] had been granted to formulate comments on the statements [should] be added to the period granted for presenting comments and evidence on the arguments concerning possible reparations and costs in [the] case of the 19 tradesmen filed by the Commission. 31. On May 6, 2003, following the instructions of the President, the Secretariat informed the State that: a) The Court considers that the sworn written statements requested from the Inter-American Commission in the Order of the President of the Court of April 22, 2003, are documentary evidence. Therefore, they are processed in the same way as documentary evidence, and not as expert or testimonial evidence, which is received in the presence of the Court, the Inter-American Commission and the State. Consequently, the Colombian State’s request is not admissible; and b) The period granted to the State to submit its comments and evidence on possible reparations and costs in the case is independent of the period granted to the Inter-American Commission for presentation of the sworn written statements and, to the State, for any comments it deems pertinent. Should the State require an extension in order to present the said comments, it should advise the Secretariat as soon as possible. 32. On May 15, 2003, the Commission forwarded a communication in which it requested an extension for the presentation of the sworn written statements (supra para. 29). The following day, on the instructions of the President, the Secretariat advised that a non-extendible period until June 23, 2003, had been granted for the Commission to present the said statements. 33. On June 23, 2003, in response to the Order of the President of April 22, 2003 (supra para. 29), the Commission remitted copies of the ten sworn written statements made by Carmen Rosa Barrera Sánchez, Lina Noralba Navarro Flórez, Luz Marina Pérez Quintero, Miryam Mantilla Sánchez, Ana Murillo de Chaparro, Suney Dinora Jauregui Jaimes, Ofelia Sauza de Uribe, Rosalbina Suárez de Sauza, Marina Lobo Pacheco and Manuel Ayala Mantilla. The Commission also advised that “[o]wing to unforeseen circumstances, the testimonies of Bernardo Barragán Flórez and Marco Antonio Chaparro were not included.” On June 30, the Commission submitted the originals of the said statements.