7 reparations and costs, to hear the final oral arguments of the parties, and the final oral observations of the Commission regarding these. Similarly, by means of said order, it was ordered to receive statements given before notary public (affidavit) from 11 declarants, all proposed by the representatives, two witnesses proposed by the State and eight expert witnesses, as required, proposed by the Commission, the representatives and the State, which were presented on May 15, 2017 by the Commission, and on May 19, 20179 by the State and the representatives. On May 22, 2017, the representatives forwarded the affidavit of a declarant, in accordance with the order of May 15, 2017. Additionally, in accordance with the orders of April 21 and May 15, 2017, an alleged victim proposed by the representatives and a witness proposed by the State were summoned to testify at the hearing. The public hearing was held on May 25 and 26, 2017 during the Court's 118th Regular Session, held at the Court's headquarters.10 11. Final written arguments and observations. On June 26, 2017, the parties and the Commission presented their final written arguments and observations, respectively. Along with the final written arguments, the representatives attached several documents. In addition, the representatives and the State indicated several documents accessible through online links. On August 3, 2017, the Secretariat of the Court, following instructions from the President, granted the parties and the Commission a period until August 14, 2017 to present their observations on said annexes, which were presented by the State and the representatives on the indicated day and the Commission reported that it had no observations. 12. Evidence to facilitate adjudication of the case. On February 7 and 22, 2018, the State and the representatives were requested, pursuant to Article 58(b) of the Rules of Procedure, to provide certain documents as evidence to facilitate adjudication of the case, which were presented on February 15 and March 1 and 7, 2018. On March 20, 2018, the parties and the Commission were asked for their observations regarding said documents, which were presented on April 2 and 3, 2018.11 13. Deliberation of the case. The Court began the deliberation of this judgment on November 21, 2018. III JURISDICTION 14. The Court is competent to hear this case, pursuant to Article 62(3) of the American Convention, as Colombia has been a State Party to the Convention since July 31, 1973 and recognized the contentious jurisdiction of the Court on June 21, 1985. http://www.corteidh.or.cr/docs/asuntos/omeara_15_05_17.pdf. Additionally, In the last order issued there was a modification, on request from the representatives, to the method of declaration for one declarant, who presented their declaration via affidavit as it was not possible for them to attend for health reasons. Therefore only one alleged victim appeared before the Court. 9 Pursuant to an extension requested by the Commission, on April 25, 2017, the parties and the Commission were granted a non-extendable term until May 19, 2017 to submit the affidavits. 10 The following appeared at this hearing: (a) for the Inter-American Commission: Silvia Serrano Guzmán and Selene Soto Rodríguez, lawyers from the Executive Secretariat of the Commission; (b) for the representatives: Gustavo Gallón Giraldo, Fredy Alejandro Malambo Ospina and Carolina Solano Gutiérrez of the CCJ, and Viviana Krsticevic of CEJIL, and (c) for the State: Ángela María Ramírez Rincón, agent of the State; and Ana Milena González Román and María del Pilar Gutiérrez Perilla, advisers. 11 The representatives presented their observations on April 9, 2018, because due to a material error, in the brief presented on April 3, they presented a brief from another case.