be assessed in the corresponding chapter, together with the other elements of the body of evidence, taking into account the observations made by the parties. 77 80. In accordance with the Court’s case law, the statements of the alleged victims cannot be considered alone, but must be assessed together with all the evidence in the proceedings, because they are useful to the extent that they can offer further information on the alleged violations and their consequences. 78 Consequently, Court admits these statements (supra paras. 9, 11 and 65), and will assess them based on the criteria indicated. 81. The Court notes that the State did not forward the affidavits of the witnesses Jimmy Sierra and Bolívar Sierra, proposed by the State and convened by the President to declare by affidavit in his Order of June 3, 2011 (supra para. 9 and footnote 12). In this regard, the Court recalls that, according to Article 50(4) of the Court’s Rules of Procedure, “[t]he party who offers a deponent shall be responsible for their appearance before the Tribunal or the submission of their affidavit, as applicable.” VII RIGHTS TO PERSONAL LIBERTY, PERSONAL INTEGRITY, LIFE, AND TO RECOGNITION OF JURIDICAL PERSONALITY, IN RELATION TO THE OBLIGATION TO RESPECT AND TO ENSURE THE RIGHTS OF NARCISO GONZÁLEZ MEDINA 82. In this chapter, the Court will determine whether what happened to the presumed victims constitutes the alleged forced disappearance and, if appropriate, will rule on the consequent international responsibility of the State. The Commission and the representatives alleged the violation of the rights to recognition of juridical personality, 79 to life, 80 to personal integrity, 81 to personal liberty, 82 to judicial guarantees, to judicial protection, 83 and to 77 Cf. Case of Loayza Tamayo v. Peru. Merits. Judgment of 17 September 1997. Series C No. 33, para. 43, and Case of the Barrios Family v. Venezuela. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 24, 2011. Series C No. 237, paras. 23 and 24. 78 Cf. Case of Loayza Tamayo v. Peru. Merits, supra note 77, para. 43, and Case of Fontevecchia and D’Amico v. Argentina, supra note 70, para. 15. 79 Article 3 of the American Convention establishes that “[e]very person has the right to recognition as a person before the law.” 80 Article 4(1) of the American Convention establishes that “[e]very person has the right to have his life respected. This right shall be protected by law and, in general, from the moment of conception. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his life.” 81 The pertinent part of Article 5 of the American Convention establishes that: “1. [e]very person has the right to have his physical, mental, and moral integrity respected. 2. No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman, or degrading punishment or treatment. All persons deprived of their liberty shall be treated with respect for the inherent dignity of the human person.” 82 Article 7(1) of the American Convention establishes that “[e]very person has the right to personal liberty and security.” 83 Article 8(1) of the American Convention establishes that: “[e]very person has the right to a hearing, with due guarantees and within a reasonable time, by a competent, independent, and impartial tribunal, previously established by law, in the substantiation of any accusation of a criminal nature made against him or for the determination of his rights and obligations of a civil, labor, fiscal, or any other nature […].” Article 25(1) of the American Convention establishes that: “[e]veryone has the right to simple and prompt recourse, or any other effective recourse, to a competent court or tribunal for protection against acts that violate his fundamental rights recognized by the constitution or laws of the state concerned or by this Convention, even though such violation may have been committed by persons acting in the course of their official duties.” 27