7. The briefs of October 26 and 27, 2012, in which the representatives, the State and the Commission submitted their observations to the definitive lists of deponents. The Inter-American Commission objected to the three expert witnesses proposed by the State. The State, for its part, challenged the expert witness proposed by the Commission and the two expert witnesses proposed by the representatives. 8. The briefs of November 16 and 19, 2012, in which the expert witnesses challenged responded to the observations submitted by the Commission and by the State. CONSIDERING THAT: 1. The offer and admission of evidence, together with the summons of alleged victims, witnesses and expert witnesses, are regulated in Articles 35(1)(f), 40(2)(c), 41(1)(c), 46, 47, 50 and 57 of the Court’s Rules of Procedure. 2. The Commission and the parties submitted their proposed deponents at the proper procedural stage (supra Having Seen 1, 2 and 3). 3. The Court guaranteed the parties the right of defense in respect of the offers of evidence contained in their briefs submitting the case, of pleadings and motions and the answer brief, as well as in their definitive lists. 4. As regards the statements offered by the parties which have not been objected to, the President considers it appropriate to obtain this evidence, so that the Court may assess their value at the proper procedural moment, within the context of the existing body of evidence and according to the rules of sound judgment. The object of these statements and the manner in which they will be rendered shall be decided in the operative part of this Order (infra Operative paragraphs). 5. In this Order the President will examine the following aspects in particular: a) the tacit withdrawal of some statements; b) the admissibility of the expert evidence offered by the Inter-American Commission; c) the State’s objection to the expert witnesses proposed by the representatives; d) the Commission’s objection to the expert witnesses proposed by the State; e) the Commission’s request to submit questions to the expert witnesses offered by the representatives and by the State; f) the manner in which the statements and expert opinions will be received, and g) the final oral and written arguments and observations. A) Tacit withdrawal of some statements 6. The President notes that in the brief of pleadings and motions the representatives offered as testimonial evidence the statements of Ramiro Rivera, Julio González, Marcelo Dotti, Guillermo Landázuri, Julio César Trujillo, Agustín Grijalva and Luis Pásara. However, when presenting their definitive list of deponents, the representatives did not refer to those statements. According to Article 46(1) of the Rules, the proper procedural moment for the representatives to confirm or withdraw the statements offered in their brief of pleadings and motions is in the definitive list 2   

Select target paragraph3