d) Miguel Cillero, an expert witness proposed by the representatives, a professor of Law at Diego Portales University in Chile, who rendered an expert opinion on: the treatment of the principle of the best interests of the child under International Law; e) Monica Pinto, an expert witness proposed by the representatives, a law professor and dean at the Law School of the University of Buenos Aires, who rendered an expert opinion on: the development of international human rights law in relation to non-discrimination and the treatment of sexual orientation as a suspect category; f) Maria Alicia Espinoza Abarzúa, an expert witness proposed by the representatives, a child and adolescent psychiatrist, who rendered an expert opinion on: the alleged mental damage caused and the alleged need for therapy of the daughters of Ms. Atala Riffo; g) Claudia Figueroa Morales, an expert witness proposed by the representatives, an adult psychiatrist, who rendered an expert opinion on: i) the mental health and alleged impact on the life plan of Ms. Atala Riffo as a result of the custody proceedings and ii) Ms. Atala Riffo’s alleged need for psychiatric support in the future; h) Juan Pablo Olmedo, a witness proposed by the representatives, who made a statement regarding: the alleged interference with the private life of Ms. Atala during the custody proceedings in which he acted as her lawyer; i) Sergio Vera Atala, a witness proposed by the representatives, who made a statement regarding: the alleged impact on his family life, on his mother’s life, on Ms. Atala Riffo and on the lives of his sisters as a result of the legal proceedings in Chile; j) María del Carmen Riffo Véjar, a witness proposed by the representatives, who made a statement regarding: the alleged impact that the decision of the Supreme Court of Chile had on her family life, on her daughter's life, on Ms. Atala Riffo and on her granddaughters; k) Judith Riffo Véjar, a witness proposed by the representatives, who made a statement regarding: the alleged impact that the decision of the Supreme Court of Chile had on her family life, on her niece’s life, on Ms. Atala Riffo and on her grand nieces; l) Elías Atala Riffo, a witness proposed by the representatives, who made a statement regarding: the alleged impact that the decision of the Supreme Court of Chile has had on his family life, on his sister's life, on Ms. Atala Riffo and on his nieces; and m) Emma De Ramón, a witness proposed by the representatives, who made a statement regarding: the process experienced by the family of Ms. Atala during the custody proceedings and after the judgment issued by the Supreme Court of Chile. As to the evidence produced at the public hearing, the Court heard the statements of 18. the alleged victim and five expert witnesses: 10