30. By a letter dated 4 May 2016, the Registry served the observations of the Applicant on the Court's Order of 18 March 2016 on the Respondent, and requested the Respondent to submit its observations if any, within 15 days. 31. This Order is with respect to the procedural matters raised by the Applicant as alluded to in paragraph 24 above. Issue 1: The Applicant's Request to Reject the amicus curiae brief submitted by the National Commission for the Fight Against Genocide. 32. At the public hearing, the Applicant made an oral application subsequently supported by written submissions requesting the Court to deny the National Commission for the Fight Against Genocide (hereinafter “NCFAG’) amicus curiae status and requesting it not to receive their observations. 33. The Applicant contests the neutrality of NCFAG, on the basis that it has no independent status from the Respondent, as it is an official organ responsible to the President Consultative whose Council policies which and orientation are determined by the acts under the orders of the President of the Respondent State. 34. The Applicant further argues that NCFAG is instrumental in implementing genocide laws which are vague and subject to criticism. The Applicant also argues that the Executive Secretary of NCFAG has already expressed public criticism of the Applicant. 35. The Respondent did not submit observations on this issue. 36. In deciding this matter, the Court is guided by Rule 45 of its Rules which provides: “The Court may, of its own accord, or at the request of a party, or the representatives of the Commission, where applicable, obtain any evidence which in its opinion may provide clarification of the facts of a case. The Court may, inter alia, decide to hear as a witness or expert or in any other capacity any person whose evidence, assertions 7