4 13. On May 5, 1998, the Secretariat sent a note to the victim’s next of kin wherein it explained the criteria for introducing evidence at this stage of the proceedings and reported that the President had denied their request seeking an extension of the deadline for submitting the definitive list of witnesses and experts. It also advised them that the date for submitting the sworn statements being offered in evidence would be set shortly. By Secretariat note dated May 19, 1998, the victim’s next of kin were notified that the deadline for submitting the sworn statements would be June 5 of that year. 14. On May 11, 1998, Peru submitted its observations on the reparations briefs filed by the victim’s next of kin and by the Commission and attached documentary evidence. It offered neither witnesses nor expert witnesses. 15. On June 4, 1998, the victim’s next of kin submitted a power of attorney signed in Amsterdam, Kingdom of the Netherlands, on May 22, 1998; a statement made and signed in the presence of a notary by Cronwell Pierre Castillo-Castillo, Mónica Inés Castillo-Páez and Carmen Rosa Páez-Warton, and a technical report prepared by Dr. Carmen Wurst-Calle de Landazuri on the "psychological consequences of disappearances and political asylum" and the appendix thereto. 16. On June 4, 1998, Peru named Ana Reátegui-Napurí as its alternate agent in the instant case. 17. On June 9, 1998, the Court held the public hearing on reparations and compensatory damages. Appearing before the Court: for the victim’s next of kin: Ariel Dulitzky Ronald Gamarra, For the Inter-American Commission: Domingo E. Acevedo, Delegate, For the State of Peru: Ana Reátegui-Napurí, Alternate Agent Jennie Vizcarra-Alvizuri and Walter Palomino-Cabezas. 18. On July 20, 1998, the State filed two briefs containing a number of objections to the affidavits signed in the presence of a notary, the expert report prepared by Dr. Carmen Wurst-Calle de Landazuri, and to the power of attorney submitted by the victim’s next of kin on June 4, 1998 (supra 15). The State’s contention was that the affidavits signed in the presence of a notary and submitted on June 23 of that year were extemporaneous. On August 22, 1998, the Secretariat replied that the case file showed that the statements in question were reported on June 11 of that year. On September 9, 1998, Peru petitioned the Court to inform it of the processing given to those objections; accordingly, on September 11, 1998, the Secretariat informed the State that the objections had been brought to the attention of both the Commission