submitted by the Fundación Pro Bono-Colombia.11 These documents were submitted in Spanish; consequently, in a letter dated February 24, 2015, the Secretariat asked that the amicus brief be submitted in English, as this was the official language of the case. The brief was received in English on March 10, 2015. 10. Final written arguments and observations. On March 4, 2015, the State presented its final written arguments and annexes. On March 5, 2015, the representatives and the Commission presented their final written arguments and annexes, and their final written observations, respectively. 11. Observations on the annexes. On March 26, 2015, the Court’s Secretariat forwarded the annexes to the final written arguments to the parties and the Commission, asking them for any observations they deemed pertinent. In a communication dated April 7, 2015, the Commission advised that it had no observations to make on these annexes. Subsequently, on April 13, 2015, the representatives presented comments on the annex sent by the State. The State did not submit observations on the annexes sent by the representatives. 12. Helpful evidence. On March 26, 2015, on the instructions of the President and pursuant to the provisions of Article 58(b) of the Court’s Rules of Procedure, the Secretariat asked the State to present helpful evidence. This request was ratified on April 15, 2015. In a communication of April 29, 2015, the State forward some of the information requested. 12 13. Observations on the helpful evidence. In communications of May 12 and 13, 2015, both the representatives and the Commission presented their observations on the helpful evidence submitted by the State that had been requested during the public hearing in this case and again on March 26 and April 15, 2015 (supra para. 12). 14. On-site procedure in the Kaliña and Lokono communities (hereinafter “the visit” or “the on-site procedure”). From August 17 to 19, 2015, a delegation from the Court conducted an onsite procedure in part of the territory claimed by the Kaliña and Lokono peoples in order to observe some of these areas, including some of the nature reserves, and to meet with the parties, the Commission, and various authorities and members of the communities.13 This was 11 The amicus curiae brief was signed and submitted by Juliana Amaya Lamir, Director and Legal Representative of the Fundación ProBono-Colombia (merits file, folio 539). 12 In this regard, in a letter of March 26, 2015, the Court’s Secretariat recalled that the State had not sent the following information requested by the judges during the public hearing, and repeated the request: (a) the 1998 Nature Protection Resolution (the letter indicates 1992, but the correct year is 1998); (b) the draft bill on traditional authorities; (c) copies of the freehold and leasehold titles and long-term leases granted to indigenous and non-indigenous third parties, as well as information regarding how many of these titles had been awarded to non-indigenous third parties; (d) information on the alleged construction of a casino on the territory claimed by the indigenous peoples, and (e) information on the agreements reached between the State and the Kaliña and Lokono peoples so that the latter could have free access, use and enjoyment of their territories within the nature reserves. Accordingly, it granted the State until April 13, 2015, to present this information (merits file, folio 797). This request was reiterated on April 15, and the State was granted until April 29, 2015, to comply (merits file, folio 827). On that date, the State submitted some of the information that had been requested (merits file, folio 836), and indicated, without providing any evidence, that: (a) regarding the land titles and leases that it was still investigating and compiling these (merits file, folio 839), and (b) according to its research, there was no evidence of the construction of a casino in the territory claimed by the indigenous peoples (merits file, folios 840 and 868). 13 The Court’s delegation for the visit consisted of the President of the Court, Judge Humberto Antonio Sierra Porto; Emilia Segares, Deputy Secretary of the Court; Jorge Calderón Gamboa, the Secretariat’s Coordinating Lawyer, and Cecilia La Hoz Barrera, Secretariat lawyer. The State was represented by Martin Misiedjan, State Agent; Robbin Mussendijk and Grasella Jozefzoon, State representatives, and the Inter-American Commission was represented by Tracy Robinson, Commissioner, and Erick Acuña, legal adviser of the Commission. In addition, the representatives were represented by Fergus MacKay, the translator Max Ooft, Loreen Jubitana, Captain Ronald Makosi, Capitan Theo Jubitana, and other members of the communities. 8