9 para. 23). The Commission also advised that it desisted from submitting one of the statements. 33. On August 31, 2005, the representatives requested reconsideration of the President’s order of July 28, 2005, concerning the way in which the expert evidence of Bjorn Pettersson would be received and, in substitution of the decision to receive his expert evidence before notary public, that he should be convened to give his evidence during the public hearing. On the instructions of the President, the Commission and the State were granted until September 5, 2005, to submit any comments they deemed pertinent. 34. On September 6, 2005, the Commission presented its comments on the offer of Bjorn Pettersson’s expert evidence during the public hearing. 35. On September 8, 2005, the parties were informed that the Court did not consider it necessary to change the way in which the expert evidence of Bjorn Pettersson would be received. However, the Court decided to grant an extension to September 20, 2005, for the representatives to forward this expert evidence in a sworn statement before notary public. 36. On September 8, 2005, the State submitted its observations on the testimonial and expert statements forwarded by the Commission and the representatives. In this brief, the State indicated that the testimonies presented by the Commission and the representatives, and the expert evidence presented by the representatives, had not been provided by means of a statement made before notary public (affidavit), as established in the Rules of Procedure. 37. On September 9, 2005, the State presented the testimony given before notary public by Jorge Armando Otalora and Jaime Jaramillo Panesso. 38. On September 14 and 15, 2005, the representatives presented their comments on the expert evidence of Hernán Sanín Posada and on the testimony given by Jorge Armando Otalora and Jaime Jaramillo Panesso forwarded by the State. 39. On September 14, 2005, the Commission presented its observations on the sworn statements submitted to the Court by the State and the representatives (supra paras. 30, 31 and 37). 40. On September 15, 2005, Bjorn Pettersson presented an expert report in response to the request in the President’s order of July 28, 2005 (supra para. 23). 41. On September 20, 2005, the State reiterated “the acknowledgement of international responsibility made in the brief answering the application.” 42. On September 22 and 23, 2005, at a public hearing, the Court received the statements of the witnesses and the opinions of the expert witnesses proposed by the parties, and heard the arguments of the Commission, the representatives and the State on the preliminary objection, and merits, reparations and costs. There appeared before the Court: (a) for the Inter-American Commission: Susana Villarán, delegate, and Víctor H. Madrigal Borloz, Juan Pablo Albán, Lilly Ching and Manuela Cuvi, legal advisers; (b) for the representatives: María Victoria Fallon Morales,