135. Taking into account the said criteria for assessing the body of evidence, the Court will now determine, first, if what happened to Narciso González Medina constitutes a forced disappearance that can be attributed to the State (infra paras. 137 to 170), and then rule on the alleged violations of the obligation to respect and ensure the human rights of Mr. González Medina (infra paras. 174 to 195). 136. In order to analyze what happened to the presumed victim, the Court will take into account different indicative elements that help determine what happened in the following order: (1) alleged context at the time of the facts; (2) influence of Narciso González Medina on Dominican society and public impact of his speeches and writings; (3) surveillance of Narciso González Medina; (4) statements of those who testified that they had seen Narciso González Medina in State entities, and (5) failure to determine the whereabouts of Narciso González Medina and to clarify the facts. In addition, it will analyze (6) the alleged destruction and alteration of documents as part of the forced disappearance. D.1) Alleged context at the time of the facts 137. The Court observes that both the Commission and the representatives described various contextual factors that they considered indications of the forced disappearance of Narciso González Medina. In this regard, during the proceedings before the Court, different testimonial and expert evidence was received, as well as documentary evidence, regarding the alleged context at the time of the alleged disappearance of Narciso González Medina. 138. The Court has verified that, in fact, the political and social context at the time of the events was not the same as that which existed under the Trujillo dictatorship or “the 12 years of Balaguer (supra paras. 87 and 88). Witnesses Juan Bolívar Díaz and Huchi Lora, as well as expert witnesses before the Court explained that the repression “did not disappear completely and, at times, there were threats and tensions that affected the exercise of freedom of expression,” and that the case of Mr. González Medina was an exception, because “at that time, the repression was applied in another way, more subtlely; […] it had other characteristics.” 170 139. Added to this, the Court observes that, at the time of the facts, there was an extremely tense political climate owing to the alleged electoral fraud (supra paras. 89, 90 and 91), which was confirmed by senior authorities of the Government of the time, including the Secretary for the Armed Forces and the Head of the National Police who, in statements made during the domestic investigation of this case, noted the climate of political instability and unrest at the time, as well as the rumors of a possible disruption of public order. 171 As a result of this situation of political tension, according to different witnesses before the Court, as well as articles published in the press at the time, over the period from May 16, 1994, until the agreement reached with the opposition parties (several months later), the country 170 Testimony given by witness Luis Eduardo Lora Iglesias (Huchi Lora) on June 26, 2011, supra note 88, folio 1112. Similarly, cf. Testimony provided by expert witness Robert Salvador Ramos Vargas on June 16, 2011, supra note 90, folio 1179, and testimony of witness Juan Bolívar Díaz on June 16, 2011, supra note 98, folios 1126 and 1127. 171 Cf. Summary of the statement made by Rafael Guerrero Peralta on December 10, 1996, supra note 122, folio 4349; statement made by Rafael Guerrero Peralta before the Review Chamber on September 26, 2002, supra note 122, folio 1966; undated statement made by Constantino Matos Villanueva before the Joint Board (file of attachments to the application, attachment 13, folio 3866); testimony provided by expert witness Rafael Molina Morillo on June 22, 2011, supra note 93, folio 1085; article published in Rumbo magazine of July 20 to 26, 1994 entitled “De jueves a jueves en RD” (file of attachments to the pleadings and motions brief, attachment 9, folio 4853); newspaper article entitled “Embrollo electoral apunta hacia crisis política,” supra note 92, folio 4849, and article “Negotiated elections,” supra note 86, folios 4895 and 4896. 45