4 on alleged “difficulties in the consulting process” for the appointment of the judge. On May 19, 2005, the State sent a notice reaffirming its request for extension alleging that it had unwillingly commited a mistake in that “the original request for extension mistakingly stated the name of a case that has not yet been submitted to the Court[,] while the request should have made reference to the Sawhoyamaxa case. Likewise, it has not been possible to effect the appointment owing to difficulties in the process of consulting." Finally, the State requested that “should the […] Court grant the requested extension,” it accept the appointment of Mr. Oscar MartínezPérez as Agent and of Mr. Ramón Fogel as ad hoc Judge. 13. On May 26, 2005, the Secretariat informed the State that the proposed appointment of Mr. Ramón Fogel as ad hoc Judge would be submitted to the consideration of the full Court, to the pertinet effects. 14. On May 18, 2005, the representatives filed their brief of requests and arguments. The appendixes were received by the Secretariat on May 23, 2005. 15. On June 15, 2005, the Secretariat informed the State that, in accordance with Articles 10(4) of the Court’s Statute and 18(3) of the Rules of Procedure, the Court decided to refuse Mr. Ramón Fogel’s appointment as ad hoc Judge in the instant case, as it was submitted after the term the State had for doing so had expired (supra para. 12). 16. On July 13, 2005, the State filed its answer to the application and comments on the brief of requests and arguments (hereinafter, “answer to the application”). The appendixes were received by the Secretariat on August 4, 2005. 17. On September 29, 2005, the Secretariat informed the parties that after analyzing the main briefs submitted by the Commission, the representatives and the State, the full Court deemed that it was not necessary to convene a public hearing in the instant case. Moreover, the Secretariat asked the Commission, the representatives and the State, following orders of the President, to furnish a final list of the witnesses and expert witnesses proposed by each of them. 18. On December 21, 2005, the President issued an Order whereby it deemed it convenient to receive in the form of affidavits, the testimonies of Carlos MarecosAponte, Leonardo González, Gladys Benítez, Mariana Ayala and Elsa Ayala, who were proposed by the Commission and the representatives; the testimony of Martín Sanneman, proposed by the representatives and the testimony of Oscar Centurión, proposed by the State, as well as the expert reports of José Marcelo Brunstein and Fulgencio Pablo Balmaceda-Rodríguez, who were proposed by the Commission and the representatives; the expert report of Andrew Paul Leake, proposed by the representatives; and the expert report of Augusto Fogel, proposed by the State. Likewise, the President ordered that the expert reports prepared by José Alterto Braunstein, Enrique Castillo, José Antonio Aylwin Oyarzún, Bartomeu Meliá i Lliteres, Bernardo Jacquet and César Escobar-Catebecke for the Case of the Indigenous Community Yakye Axa against Paraguay1 be added to the record in the instant case. Likewise, the President granted the Commission, the representatives and the State a non-postponable term of ten days from the receipt of the aforementioned affidavits to submit the comments they might deem appropriate. In such Order, the President likewise informed the parties that they had a non-postponable term expiring on 1 Case of the Indigenous Community Yakye Axa, Judgment of June 17, 2005. Series C No. 125.