32 politically, for the Military Forces: attaining maximum violence at a low political cost for the armed institution.” He also asserted that “[i]mpunity of human rights violations has been a constant aspect of government actions throughout these decades.” Among the mechanisms and practices that have enabled impunity, the expert witness highlighted not carrying out arrest warrants, threats and attacks against the Judiciary and the investigative bodies, granting the military forces authority as judicial police, ambiguous government action against the paramilitary, lack of a policy of cleansing and depuration of the Military Forces, and the existence of legal mechanisms to allow impunity such as Decree 128 of 2003. Andreu also stated that, “in the course of 20 years, [he] ha[s] reached the conclusion that in all these areas where the paramilitary are present, which always coincide with areas where there is a high concentration of military forces, with highly sophisticated telecommunications systems, transportation, and so forth, [he] finds that is impossible to think that the paramilitary can move around without the complicity, the connivance, the logistic information and intelligence support by the military forces.” With regard to “the victims who have filed complaints [he stated that they] constantly suffer harassment, [and that there] have been cases not only of harassment, but also […] that have ended in death. If one looks at most of the cases that have been brought before an international body, where there has been more pressure on the national authorities, one finds that in most cases, the next of kin have had to be taken abroad […]”. Furthermore, this harassment has “a very perverse effect, […] it establishes the terror syndrome, and since the cost of obtaining true justice and reparation is so high for the victims themselves, many victims do not file complaints. […] In face of this situation [it is] difficult for some investigators who truly want justice to be done and to elucidate the facts.” Since 1989 the maltreatment of victims has been greater, there have been cases of beheading, mutilation, incinerations, and so forth. This phenomenon has two objectives: to heighten terror in small communities and to make evidence disappear to avoid investigation by the Public Prosecutor’s Office. The expert witness suggested a review of military doctrine and of the armed forces, as well as a policy of cleansing and depuration of said forces, and a redefinition of their makeup. He also suggested taking large-scale measures to strengthen the Judiciary. C) ASSESSMENT OF THE EVIDENCE Assessment of the Documentary Evidence 77. In this case, as in others,10 the Court accepts the evidentiary value of documents submitted by the parties at the appropriate procedural moment that were neither disputed nor challenged and whose authenticity was not questioned. 10 See Case of Acosta Calderón, supra note 7, para. 45; Case of Yatama, supra note 7, para. 112, and Case of Fermín Ramírez, supra note 7, para. 48.