21 Restraint and Seclusion for Behavioral Health Services, 25 February 1999; American Geriatrics Society Position Statement: Guidelines For Restraint Use, Last Updated January 1, 1997, and American Medical Association, Guidelines for the Use of Restraints in Long-Term Care Facilities, June 1989. 52. Regarding the sworn statements given by Milton Freire-Pereira (supra para. 46(1)(a), José Jackson Coelho-Sampaio, Domingos Sávio do Nascimento-Alves, Luís Fernando Farah-Tófoli and Braz Geraldo-Peixoto (supra paras. 46(2)(a), 46(2)(b), 46(2)(c) and 46(2)(d)), which were signed by the witnesses and legalized by a Notary Public, but which were not given before a public official whose acts command full faith and credit, the Court admits them insofar as they are in accordance with the object set forth in Order of the President issued on September 22, 2005 (supra para. 24) and assesses them as a whole with the rest of the body of evidence, applying thereto the standards of reasonable credit and weight analysis . In this regard, the Court takes into consideration the comments submitted by the Commission as to the statement given by Mr. José Jackson Coelho-Sampaio (supra para. 29). On other occasions the Court has admitted sworn statements which were not given before a public official vested with the authority to confer full faith and credit to the acts passed before him provided that legal certainty and procedural equality between the parties are not impaired.16 53. Regarding the expert report submitted by Mr. Eric Rosenthal ( supra para. 46(3)(a)), the Courts admits it insofar as it is in accordance with the object set forth in Order of the President issued on September 22, 2005 ( supra para. 24) and assesses it as a whole with the rest of the body of evidence, applying thereto the standards of reasonable credit and weight analysis. On other occasions the Court has admitted expert reports which were not given before a public official vested with the authority to confer full faith and credit to the acts passed before him, provided that legal certainty and procedural equality between the parties are not impaired.17 54. Regarding the sworn statement given by Mr. Emilio de Medeiros-Viana, whose signature was legalized by a Notary Public, and considering the statements made both by him and by the State in that according to the Brazilian legislation he was disqualified to give testimony, the Court does not admit the statement submitted by the State in that regard (supra para. 27) into the body of evidence in the instant case. As to the expert report given by Mr. Dalmo de Abreu-Dallari, it was timebarred for it was submitted on November 11, 2005, that is, fourteen days after the expiration of the period established for that purpose, whereby the Court shall not admit it into the body of evidence in the instant case (supra para. 30). 55. As to the press documents submitted by the representatives, the Court considers that they may be assessed insofar as they refer to public and notorious facts or statements given by State officials or when they confirm aspects related to the case in point.18 Testimonial and Expert Evidence Assessment Cf. Case of Baldeón-García, supra note 4, para. 66; Case of the Sawhoyamaxa Indigenous Community, supra note 4, para. 42; and Case of Acevedo-Jaramillo et al, supra note 4, para. 191. 16 Cf. Case of Baldeón-García, supra note 4, para. 67; Case of the Sawhoyamaxa Indigenous Community, supra note 4, para. 42; and Case of Acevedo-Jaramillo et al, supra note 4, para. 192. 17 Cf. Case of Baldeón-García, supra note 4, para. 70; Case of the Sawhoyamaxa Indigenous Community, supra note 4, para. 45; and Case of Acevedo-Jaramillo et al, supra note 4, para. 199. 18