9. Order to convene a hearing. The Court President issued an order on April 21, 2021,7 convening the parties and the Commission to a public hearing on the preliminary objection and possible merits, reparations and costs. The order called for an alleged victim, a witness,8 and two expert witnesses to appear at the public hearing and ordered statements via affidavit before a public officer from thirty-two alleged victims, twelve witnesses and three expert witnesses.9 10. Public hearing. Because of the exceptional circumstances caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, the hearing took place via videoconference, in keeping with the provisions of the Court’s Rules of Procedure, from May 31 through June 1, 2021, during the 142nd regular session.10 Statements were taken at hearing from one alleged victim brought by the representatives and two expert witnesses brought by the State. The judges also requested additional information and explanations from the parties and the Commission. 11. Final written arguments and observations. On July 1, 2021, the parties submitted their final written arguments, the representatives added several annexes, and the Inter-American Commission filed its final written observation. On July 19, 2021, the State lodged a request for a time extension to submit observations on the appendices sent by the representatives, and the Court acceded. On July 20, 2021, the Commission reported that it had no comments concerning the annexes. That same day, the State submitted its observations on the documents annexed to the representatives’ final written arguments. 12. Deliberation of the case. The Court deliberated on the instant judgment in a virtual session on November 10, 2021.11 7 Cfr. Case of the Teachers of Chañaral and other Municipalities v. Chile. Order of the President of the InterAmerican Court of Human Rights, April 21, 2021. Available in Spanish at: http://www.corteidh.or.cr/docs/asuntos/teachers_de_chanaral_y_otras_municipalidades_21_04_21.pdf. The order contained a material error identified by the Commission in a brief filed on April 27, 2021. The material error was rectified by means of note CDH-32-2019/079, dated May 7, 2021, in application of Article 76 of the Court’s Rules of Procedure, correcting whereas clause 30 of the order by replacing the phrase “without indicating whether it would be received in public hearing or by affidavit,” with “requesting that it be received in public hearing.” It was stated, however, that the decision to receive the statement from this expert witness by affidavit would remain standing. 8 Witness Daniella Maureira had originally been offered as an expert witness. She was challenged by the representatives, and the President decided to admit this challenge in an order issued in April 21, 2021. Nonetheless, the Court deemed that the object of her statement would be useful and decided to admit her as a material witness. The State withdrew this testimony, however, in a written communication on May 21, 2021. 9 The State filed a brief on May 3, 2021, asking the Court to give its opinion on the factual framework of the case prior to the hearing. The Registrar replied in a note on May 7, 2021, at the behest of the President, saying that in the public hearing, the State would have the opportunity to submit its arguments about the factual framework as well as any other argument it judged relevant. 10 The following appeared at the hearing: (a) for the Inter-American Commission, Joel Hernández García, Commissioner; Marisol Blanchard, Assistant Executive Secretary, and Jorge Meza Flores and Analía Banfi Víquez, advisors; (b) for the representatives of the alleged victims, attorneys Ciro Colombara López, Giampero Fava Cohen, Carola Cotroneo Ormeño, Alexandra Orrego Da Silva and Nelson Veliz Pareda; and for the State of Chile, Ambassador Jaime Chomali Garib and designated agents and alternate agents Francisco Javier Urbina, Constanza Richards Yáñez, Josemaría Rodríguez Conca, Oliver Román López Serrano, Milenko Bertrand Galindo Arriagada, Karen Soledad Zacur López and Francisco Cabrera. 11 Due to the exceptional circumstances brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic, this judgment was deliberated on and approved during the 145th regular session, which was held using remote technology in keeping with the provisions of the Court’s Rules of Procedure. See press release number 79/2021 of October 28, 2021, at: https://corteidh.or.cr/docs/comunicados/cp_79_2021_eng.pdf. 6