10 54. On January 6, 2006 the Secretariat, following the President’s instructions, requested that the common intervener present the document titled “List of Victims” in the Spanish language, “as soon as possible”. Said document is part of the appendixes to the brief of pleadings and motions (supra para. 53). 55. On January 15, 2006 the common intervener presented a brief with its appendixes, through which she forwarded the translations to the Spanish language of several documents that had been presented in English in the proceedings before the Commission and the Court. On January 19, 2006 the Secretariat indicated that it was still awaiting the missing translation of the document titled “List of Victims” (supra para. 54). 56. On February 12, 2006 the State presented its response to the petition and observations to the brief of pleadings and motions, accompanied by documentary evidence and it offered testimonial evidence. On February 20, 2006 Peru forwarded the appendixes to said brief. In said brief, the State made an assent and partial acknowledgment of international responsibility for certain violations argued by the Commission (infra paras. 129 through 159). Likewise, Peru indicated that ‘it reserv[ed] the right to express the legal grounds in a future brief[, …] for which it request[ed] a reasonable period of time to be able to develop them with the properties that a case of this importance deserve[d].” 57. On March 3, 2006 the Secretariat, following the President’s instructions and in application of the regulatory provisions, informed the State that it could not grant a new term to develop the “legal grounds” (supra para. 56), since it was a procedural act not contemplated in the Rules of Procedure. The Secretariat also told it that it would have the opportunity to present its arguments when exposing their final oral arguments in the eventual public hearing that will be summoned, as well as to present their final written arguments. 58. On March 13, 2006 the Secretariat, following the President’s instructions, requested that the parties forward, no later than March 24, 2006, their observations to the request made by the Commission in paragraph 203 of its application, in the sense that the Court accepted as testimonial evidence, “in virtue of the principle of procedural economy,” the statements given under oath by Mrs. Mónica Feria Tinta and Avelina García Calderón Orozco, during the hearing on the merits of the case celebrated before the Commission on November 14, 2001, included in Appendix 269 of the application. 59. On March 21, 2006 the common intervener presented a brief, through which it indicated that it forwarded its “observations” to the response to the petition presented by the State (supra para. 56). 60. On March 24, 2006 the Secretariat, following the President’s instructions, informed the common intervener that the mentioned “observations” (supra para. 59) were not admitted, since it was a procedural act not contemplated in the Rules of Procedure. Likewise, it reiterated the request made to Peru through note of November 29, 2005 (supra para. 51), in the sense that it should forward the documents regarding domestic investigations and the norms applicable to the case. 61. On March 24, 2006 the common intervener presented the translation of the document titled “List of Victims” (supra paras. 54 and 55).