brief, Venezuela denied its international responsibility for the violation of the rights alleged by the Commission and the representatives and asked that the Court: (a) “declare Report No. 11/10 inadmissible,” together with the requests for reparations and costs included in it; (b) reject the pleadings, motions and evidence submitted to the Court by Eloisa Barrios and her next of kin and, consequently, not to condemn the State to make the reparations and pay the costs requested by the representatives, and (c) urge the Commission “to annul the assertions, conclusions, and recommendations contained in Report [on Merits] No. 11/10.” Lastly, the State appointed Germán Saltrón Negretti as its Agent. 6. After the presentation of the Merits Report, the Inter-American Commission informed the Court of the following alleged supervening facts concerning three of the alleged victims in this case, who were also beneficiaries of provisional measures: (a) on October 18, 2010, it reported the alleged murder of Wilmer José Flores, on September 1, 2010; (b) on January 13, 2011, it reported the alleged attack suffered by the Néstor Caudi Barrios on January 2, 2011, and (c) on May 30, 2011, it reported the alleged murder of Juan José Barrios on May 28, 2011. The representatives and the State were informed of these incidents in communications of November 1, 2010, January 24 and June 2, 2011, respectively, in which, on the instructions of the President of the Court (hereinafter also “the President”), the parties were advised that they could forward any observations they deemed pertinent. II PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COURT 7. Following the presentation of the main briefs (supra paras. 1, 4 and 5), among others forwarded by the parties, in an order of June 1, 2011, the President required that the statements of 17 alleged victims proposed by the representatives, and the opinions of four expert witnesses, two of them proposed by the representatives, one proposed by the State, and the other required ex officio by the President, be received by affidavit. The parties were able to make observations on all the affidavits. In addition, the President convened the parties to a public hearing to receive the testimony of an alleged victim proposed by the representatives, a witness proposed by the State, and the opinions of two expert witnesses proposed by the representatives and the Commission, as well as the final oral arguments of the representatives and the State, and the final oral observations of the Commission on the merits, reparations, and costs. Finally, the President ordered the financial aid from the Legal Aid Fund a be assigned to cover the travel and lodging expenses necessary for one of the alleged victims and an expert witness indicated by the representatives to appear before the Court and give their testimony and expert witness report, respectively, during the public hearing to be celebrated in this case, as well as to cover the expenses of formalizing and sending the testimony given via affidavit, as determined by the alleged victims or their representatives. The President also ordered a case file on expenses to be opened in order to document each of the expenditures made in relation to the Legal Aid Fund7. lack of impartiality in their functions of some of the Judges who are members of the Court, presented by the State of Venezuela as a preliminary objection, did not exist. In addition, he decided that it corresponded to the Court in plenary to continue hearing the entire case until its conclusion. Cf. Case of the Barrios Family v. Venezuela. Order of the acting President of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of April 14, 2011. 7 Cf. Case of the Barrios Family v. Venezuela. Convocation to a public hearing. Order of the President of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of June 1, 2011. Prior to this, in an order of April 15, 2011, the President of the Court had declared admissible the request submitted by the alleged victims, through their representatives, to accede to the Legal Assistance Fund and had approved that the necessary financial assistance be granted for the presentation of a maximum of three statements. Cf. Case of the Barrios Family v. Venezuela. Victims’ Legal Assistance Fund. Order of the President of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of April 15, 2011. 7