those indicated by the [Commission]” or even than those they themselves had indicated. 220. Regarding the evidence to support the probable cause of death of the deceased, the date of death, and information on previous medical attention, the State indicated that the expert opinion of Pablo Balmaceda “lacks the necessary rigor and grounds for a study of this importance,” and added that “it does not include the required documentary support, because it is not accompanied by and does not refer to death certificates, autopsy protocols, or any other pertinent documentation that proves the decease and the cause of death.” 221. When testifying, Pablo Balmaceda explained that it was difficult “to collect data on the deaths, [because] there are no places to register births, and much less deaths; thus, the recollection of these individuals was only in the Community’s memory.” The expert also added that his report corroborated “the epidemiological information that exists in Paraguay, that the indigenous population has the worst health indicators.” Lastly, the representatives forwarded two death certificates,258 which were consistent with the information they had provided previously. 222. In the absence of documentary evidence that contradicts the evidence provided to the proceedings before this Court – namely, the expert opinion of Dr. Balmaceda, the health and hygiene report on the Community prepared in 2002 and 2003,259 and the two death certificates submitted by the representatives – and taking into account the proven lack of State health care (supra paras. 205, 207 and 208), as well as the inexistence of State records with this data (infra paras. 252 and 253), which are the responsibility of the State, the Court will consider that the facts alleged by the representatives and supported by the report prepared by the expert witness Pablo Balmaceda are true,260 stressing that these facts have not been formally contested by the State. 223. The Court observes that the lists presented by the Commission and the representatives include the deaths of Community members that occurred before Paraguay accepted the Court’s jurisdiction; that is, before March 11, 1993. Consequently, the Court does not have competence to examine the following cases: Eulalio Dermott Alberto, (NN [no name]) Avalos (twin 1), (NN) Avalos (twin 2), both of whom died in 1981; Adolfino López Dermott and Lorenza López Segundo, who died in 1983; Narciso Larrosa Dermott (m), who died in 1984; Nelly Gonzáles Torres (f), who died in 1987; Élida Dermott Ramírez (f), Benigno Corrientes Domínguez (m), and Herminio Corrientes Domínguez (m), who died in 1991; (NN) González Dermott (m) and Betina Avalos or Betina Rios Torres (f), who died in 1992; Esteban López Dermott (m), who died in February 1993; Luisa Ramírez (f) and Rufino Pérez (m), who died in 1993.261 224. Moreover, the Court recalls that, with regard to the facts that are the purpose of these proceedings, the representatives are not permitted to argue new facts that 258 Cf. Death certificate of Felipa Quintana of May 13, 2008; cause of death: septic shock (merits file, tome III, folio 1140), and death certificate of Sara Esther Gonzáles López of August 25, 2008, which indicate that the cause of death was: gastroenteritis, infectious dehydration and convulsions (merits file, tome III, folio 1142). 259 Expert testimony of Pablo Balmaceda, supra note 226, and Health and hygiene report on the Xakmok Kasek Community, supra note 206. 260 Cf. Health and hygiene report on the Xakmok Kasek Community, supra note 206. 261 The Court does not have any evidence to determine if the date of death was after the acceptance of its contentious jurisdiction. 51