4. To require that, when the testimony and expert opinions required in the first operative paragraph have been received, the Secretariat of the Court forward them to the other parties so that, if they consider it necessary, the representatives and the State may submit their observations on the testimony and expert opinions in their final written arguments. 5. To convene the representatives, the State and the Inter-American Commission to a public hearing to be held, during the Court’s ninety-fourth regular session, at its seat on March 2, 2012, starting at 9 a.m., to receive their final oral arguments and final oral observations, respectively, on the merits and eventual reparations and costs, and to receive the testimony of the following: A. Presumed victim proposed by the representatives 1) Yelitze Lisbeth Moreno Cova, wife of Joe Luis Castillo González, who will testify about: (i) the work of her husband, Joe Luis Castillo González; (ii) the events that she witnessed as a presumed victim; (iii) the supposed difficulties suffered and harm to her private life and that of her son, and (iv) the aspects of the investigation into the facts that she took part in or of which she is aware. B. Witness proposed by the State 2) Elvis José Rodríguez Moreno, Eighty-third Prosecutor of the Public Prosecution Service, who will testify on the measures taken by the Prosecutors who intervened in the investigation into the attack on Joe Luis Castillo González. C. Expert witnesses a. Proposed by the representatives 3) Michael Reed Hurtado, lawyer, who will refer to: (i) the absence of exhaustive lines of investigation at the domestic level into the death of Joe Luis Castillo González; (ii) the need to carry out a comprehensive investigation, using “all available evidence,” especially when crimes are committed in the context of patterns of human rights violations or in the presence of organized crime. b. Proposed by the State 4) Antonio Uribarrí, former Ombudsman of the state de Zulia, who will refer to the context of violence resulting from the displacement towards Venezuela of insurgency movements. 6. To call upon the State to facilitate the exit from and entry into its territory of the presumed victim deponent and the expert witnesses, if they reside or are in that country, who have been summoned in this Order to testify at the public hearing on merits and eventual reparations and costs, in accordance with the provisions of Article 26(1) of the Court’s Rules of Procedure. 7. To require the representative and the State to notify this Order to the persons they have proposed and who have been summoned to testify, in accordance with the provisions of Article 50(2) and 50(4) of the Rules of Procedure. 10