37 95. The State challenged the statement rendered before the Inter-American Court on March 7, 2005 by expert witness Federico Andreu (supra paras. 38 and 43), deeming that his statement seemed to be a testimony rather than an expert opinion. In this regard, the Court deems that this expert opinion can help the Court establish the facts of the instant case, insofar as it is in accordance with the object defined in said January 28, 2005 Order, and will assess it in the context of the body of evidence, applying the rules of competent analysis and taking into account the comments made by the State. VIII PROVEN FACTS 96. Having examined the evidence in the file of the instant case, the statements by the parties, as well as the acknowledgment of international responsibility by the State, the Court finds the following facts proven: The internal armed conflict in Colombia and the illegal paramilitary groups called “paramilitary” 96.1 Various guerrilla groups began to operate in Colombia since the 1960s, and due to their activities the State declared that there was a “disturbance of public order and established a state of siege in the territory of the country.” In face of this situation, on December 24, 1965, the State issued Legislative Decree 3398 “which organized national defense,” and was transitory, but became permanent legislation through Law 48 of 1968 (with the exception of Articles 30 and 34). Articles 25 and 33 of said Legislative Decree provided the legal basis for the establishment of the “self-defense groups.” The Whereas section of said legislation stated that “subversive actions fostered by extremist groups to disturb public order demand coordinated efforts by all bodies of public authority and the Nation’s leading forces” and, in this regard, the aforementioned Article 25 provided that “[a]ll Colombians, men and women, not included in the mandatory military draft, c[ould] be used by the Government in activities and work that contributes to reestablishment of normality.” Paragraph 3 of Article 33, mentioned above, provided that “[t]he Ministry of National Defense, through authorized command structures, may authorize the private use of weapons whose use is restricted to the Armed Forces.” The “self-defense groups” were legally established under said provisions, for which reason they had the support of State authorities.18 96.2 In the framework of the struggle against the guerrilla groups, the State fostered the creation of said “self-defense groups” among the civilian population, and their main aims were to assist the security forces in counterinsurgency operations and to defend themselves from the guerrilla groups. The State granted them permits to bear and possess weapons, as well as logistic support.19 18 See Legislative Decree 3398 of December 24, 1965; and Law 48 of December 16, 1968; judgment issued by the High Military Court on March 17, 1998; and report the United Nations Special Rapporteur on summary or arbitrary executions, regarding the visit to Colombia from October 11 to 20, 1989, E/CN.4/1990/22/Add.1 of January 24, 1990, and expert opinion of Federico Andreu rendered before the Inter-American Court during the public hearing held on March 7, 2005. 19 See judgment issued by the Tribunal Nacional on April 14, 1998; judgment issued by the High Military Court on March 17, 1998; judgment issued by the Regional Court in Cúcuta on May 28, 1997; report by the United Nations Special Rapporteur on summary or arbitrary executions regarding the visit to Colombia from October 11 to 20, 1989, E/CN.4/1990/22/Add.1 of January 24, 1990; and report by the