A. Expert evidence offered by the Inter-American Commission 7. According to the terms of article 35.1.f of the Rules of Procedure, “the possible appointment of expert witnesses” may be made by the Inter-American Commission “when the Inter-American public order of human rights is affected in a significant manner”, the object of which must be adequately founded. This provision means that the appointment of expert witnesses by the Commission is an exceptional opportunity that is subject to a requirement, which is not satisfied by the mere fact that the item of evidence to be received is related to an alleged human rights violation. The “InterAmerican public order of human rights must be affected in a significant manner,” and it falls upon the Commission to uphold such a situation.3 8. The Inter-American Commission offered three items of expert evidence in the following terms:  Juan Méndez. “[A]ttorney, who shall refer to the issue of genocide from the point of view of the international law, applied to the instant case, as well as the lack of effective responses from the Guatemalan judiciary towards said problem”.  Rosalina Tuyuc Velásquez. “[W]ho shall refer to the effects on the Mayan Indigenous People (specially in the area of Rabinal) within the context of the Guatemalan internal armed conflict, including the massacres, rapes, forced labour and forced disappearances".  Fredy Armando Peccerelli Monterroso. “[W]ho shall refer to the international standards in relation to the methodology of exhumations of clandestine graves. Moreover, he shall refer to the specific case of Guatemala, the obstacles to conduct the exhumations in said country and the measures that must be adopted to shed light on the facts”. 9. The State and the representatives did not object to the offering of these expert opinions and the persons proposed to such end. 10. In its definitive list, the Commission indicated that the expert opinion to be rendered by Mr. Juan Méndez “would allow the Court to establish the international standards on human rights and international humanitarian law in relation to genocide and [consider] the relevance, from the point of view of the human rights, of having a comprehensive view of the crime”. It also mentioned that "these elements would allow the Court to define standards in the field of access to justice and due diligence in the investigation of human rights violations committed in contexts like the one of the instant case”. The Presidency considers that some of the aspects of the expert opinion of Mr. Méndez deal with issues that may be of relevance to the Inter-American public order, in particular, in relation to the issue of genocide from the point of view of the international law, since it goes beyond the specific interests of the parties to the instant case. Therefore, it is deemed appropriate to admit said expert opinion, which shall be assessed in time fashion, within the context of the existing body of evidence 3 See Case of Pedro Miguel Vera Vera et al V. Ecuador. Order of the President of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights December 23, 2010; considering clause nine. Case of the El Mozote Massacre V. El Salvador. Order of the President of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of March 22, 2012, Considering Clause seventeen. 4