Asencio Mellado, Miguel Ángel Soria Fuerte and Eduardo Alcocer Povis, proposed by the State. The acting President recalls that Article 50(5) of the Rules of the Court, applicable to this case, makes provision for alleged victims or their representatives, the respondent State and, in certain cases, the Commission, to submit a list of questions that they wish to be answered by those summoned to render statements before a notary public. 49. In application of this provision, the acting President proceeds to grant an opportunity for the representative and the State to submit, if they so wish, any questions they consider pertinent to the witnesses and expert witnesses mentioned in the preceding paragraph. In turn, the Commission may submit any questions deemed pertinent regarding the expert opinions proposed by the State, for which it has been granted an opportunity to submit questions (supra Considering para. 42). In rendering their statements by affidavit, the witnesses and expert witnesses shall answer those questions, unless the President decides otherwise. The corresponding terms shall be specified infra, in the operative part of this Order. The aforementioned testimonies and expert opinions shall then be transmitted to the Commission, the representative and the State. In turn, pursuant to Article 50(6) of the Rules, the representative and the State may submit any observations considered pertinent regarding those statements, within the period specified in this Order, and the Commission may submit any observations deemed pertinent regarding the expert opinions offered by the State (infra Operative para. 4). The Court shall assess the evidentiary value of these witness statements and expert opinions in due course, taking into account all points of view, as appropriate, expressed by the parties in exercise of their right to defense and, where appropriate by the Commission, in the context of the existing body of evidence and according to the rules of sound judgment. J.2. Statements and expert opinions to be received at the public hearing 50. Given that the Court records in the instant case are ready for the opening of the oral proceedings on the preliminary objection and possible merits, reparations and costs, the acting President of this Court deems it appropriate to convene a public hearing to receive the statements of J’s sister, proposed by the representative; the statements of the witness Magda Victoria Atto Mendives, and of one deponent for information purposes, Javier Llaque Moya, proposed by the State; and two expert opinions rendered by Patricia Viseur Sellers and Stefan Trechsel, proposed by the Commission. K. Application of the Victims’ Legal Assistance Fund 51. In his Order of October 24, 2012 (supra Having Seen 5), the acting President decided to admit the request filed by the alleged victim to have access to the Victims’ Legal Assistance Fund of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, and granted the financial assistance necessary for the presentation of a maximum of two statements, either by affidavit or at a public hearing, and for the appearance of one representative at the public hearing. 52. Having determined that the statements offered by the representative shall be received by the Court and the means by which these shall be rendered, it is now appropriate to specify the amount, recipients and purpose of said assistance. 53. Accordingly, the acting President decides that financial assistance shall be assigned to cover the travel and accommodation expenses necessary to enable J’s sister to render her witness statement before the Court and so that the representative or, as the case may be, the person designated for that purpose, may appear at the public hearing to be held in the city of San Jose, Costa Rica. Also, assistance shall be provided to cover the cost of 15