5 17. On December 22, 2005, the State submitted its brief answering the application (hereinafter “answer to the application”), attaching documentary evidence. In this brief, Paraguay acquiesced to and partially acknowledged international responsibility for some of the violations alleged by the Commission (infra paras. 39 to 54). 18. On May 5, 2006, the President issued an order advising that all the members of the Inter-American Court had assessed the principal briefs in the instant case and decided that, in the circumstances, it was not necessary to convene a public hearing. Also, he ordered that the testimonies of Gladis Meilinger de Sannemann, Elva Elisa Benítez Feliu de Goiburú, Ana Armninda Bareiro de Mancuello, Rogelio Agustín Goiburú Benítez, Ricardo Lugo Rodríguez and Julio Darío Ramírez Villalba, as well as the expert opinions of Alfredo Boccia Paz and Antonio Valenzuela Pecci, all proposed by the Commission, should be submitted by statements made before notary public (affidavits), to be forwarded to the Court by May 19, 2006, at the latest. According to the third operative paragraph of this order, the parties were granted a nonextendible period until June 5, 2006, to submit any observations on these testimonies they deemed pertinent. Furthermore, he called upon the State to forward to the Secretariat of the Court, by May 19, 2006, at the latest, as helpful evidence, complete authenticated copies of the domestic administrative and judicial measures taken in relation to the alleged forced disappearance of the alleged victims, to the extent that complete and legible copies of the documentation requested had not yet been provided to the case file. Lastly, in this order, the President informed the parties that they had a non-extendible period until June 5, 2006, to submit their final written arguments on merits and reparations and costs, with which the parties should present any observations they deemed pertinent on the terms and scope of the State’s acquiescence and acknowledgement of international responsibility. 19. On May 19, 2006, with regard to the request to forward helpful evidence made by the President of the Court in the above order (supra para. 18), the State declared that “the requested documentation had already been forwarded and consisted of the attachments submitted by the Inter-American Commission […] with its application.” It added that “other proceedings relating to the case [had] been provided with the answer to the application.” On May 22, 2006, on the instructions of the President, the Secretariat reiterated to the State the request that it forward the requested documentation as soon as possible and clarified that this referred to the documentation that had not been provided by the Inter-American Commission or the State in their respective application brief and answer to the application. On the instructions of the President, the Secretariat repeated this request on July 7, 17 and 24 and August 1, 2006. Although the State did not submit any further documentation, on September 8, 2006, it repeated what it had affirmed in its communication of May 19 (infra para. 60). 20. On May 22, 2006, on the instructions of the President of the Court and pursuant to Article 45(2) of the Rules of Procedure, the Secretariat requested the Inter-American Commission to forward, by June 1, 2006, at the latest, several documents referred to in the application, which it had not offered or provided as evidence among the attachments to the application; namely the following books: Es mi informe. Los archivos secretos de la policía de Stroessner; Testimonio contra el Olvido, Reseña de la Infamia y el Terror; and En los sótanos de los generales: Los documentos ocultos de la Operación Cóndor. On July 5, 2006, after an extension had been granted, the Commission forwarded the requested documents.