-10Inter-American Court, as from September 20, 2005, to hear the final oral arguments regarding the preliminary comments and possibly on the merits of the case, reparations and costs, as well as to hear the testimony of Corina Antonieta Tarazona-Valverde, who had been proposed as a witness by the common intervener, and of José Ugaz Sánchez-Moreno and Enrique Zileri-Gibson, who had been proposed as witnesses by the State, and also the expert testimony of Samuel Abad-Yupanqui, who had been proposed as an expert witness by the Commission. Likewise, by this Order, the President informed the parties that October 24, 2005 would be the deadline to submit their final written arguments regarding the preliminary comments and possibly on the merits of the case, reparations and costs. Likewise, the President decided to leave to the consideration of the Court the decision regarding the requests made by the State in relation to the affidavits by María Angélica Arce-Guerrero and Matilde Pinchi-Pinchi (supra paras. 45 to 49,) so the Court might rule about the appropriateness of allowing any of the two requests lodged by the State, after receiving the evidence to be submitted in the public hearing, and the Arguments by the parties in that hearing and after the parties had submitted their final written arguments, in which case, the Court might request the submission of such evidence pursuant to the powers set forth in Article 45 of the Rules of Procedure. 52. On August 12, 2005, the Public Attorney of the Municipalidad Metropolitana de Lima (Metropolitan Municipality of Lima), in the name and on behalf of such Municipality, filed a brief “in its capacity as amicus curiae.” The Appendixes to that brief were filed on August 25 and 26, 2005. 53. On August 15, 2005, the State filed a brief stating that “Attorney José Ugaz Sánchez-Moreno [...] had reported that, due to force majeure reasons, and unanticipated circumstances beyond his control, he would be prevented from appearing as a witness at the public hearing” (supra para. 51) and he requested that “Attorney-at-law César Azabache-Carracciolo be authorized to appear as a witness, since he had acted as ad hoc Deputy Prosecutor and had a wide participation in the actions and investigations conducted by the Procuraduría Anticorrupción (Office of the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor-General); and in case the Honorable Court might, for some particular reason, consider that the appearance of Deputy Prosecutor Azabache would not be proper, then, he requested that Attorney César Julio Pantoja-Carrera, who had also acted as ad hoc Deputy Prosecutor, be authorized to appear before the Court[...].” 54. On August 19, 2005, the Commission forwarded a copy of the affidavits made by the following witnesses: Rogelia Rosario Agüero-Laos, Juan de Dios Berrospi-Pérez, Yeny Zully Cubas-Santos, Agustín Huanca-Gimio and Carmen Esperanza Yaranga-Lluya (supra para. 51.) By means of a note of August 23, 2005, the Secretariat, following instructions by the President, requested the Commission to send, as soon as possible, the expert opinion to be rendered by Josmell MuñozCórdoba (supra para. 51). On September 20, 2005, the Commission submitted the original of said affidavits. 55. On August 19, 22 and 23, 2005, the common intervener forwarded a copy of the affidavits containing the testimony of witnesses Wilfredo Castillo-Sabalaga and Marcela Teresa Arriola-Espino, and the expert opinion of Alejandro Silva-Reina (supra para.51.). 56. On August 25, 2005, after the expiration of the extension granted by the President, the Inter-American Commission filed a statement informing “that it did not