which must “identify the alleged victims.” According to this article, it is for the Commission and not this Court to identify the alleged victims in a case before the Court precisely and at the appropriate procedural moment. Legal certainty requires, as a general rule, that all the alleged victims are duly identified in the Merits Report, and new alleged victims may not be added subsequently, subject to the exceptional circumstances established in Article 35(2) of the Court’s Rules of Procedure relating to massive or collective violations. 35. Article 35(2) is not applicable in this case, which does not refer to massive or collective acts. Consequently, the Court will not consider A.A.D.P., María Fernanda Peña Gallardo’s son, as an alleged victim or, if applicable, a beneficiary of measures of reparation because the Commission did not mention him as an alleged victim in its Merits Report. VI EVIDENCE A. Admissibility of the documentary evidence 36. The Court received diverse documents presented as evidence by the Commission and the parties together with their principal briefs (supra paras. 1, 6 and 7) and, as in other cases, these are admitted in the understanding that they were presented at the proper procedural moment (Article 57 of the Rules of Procedure)20 and that their admissibility was not disputed or contested. 37. The Court also received documents attached to the final written arguments of the State and of representatives Jemio Mendoza and Gómez Rojas.21 In briefs of August 8 and 9, 2022, 20 In general, and pursuant to Article 57(2) of the Rules of Procedure, documentary evidence should be presented together with the briefs submitting the case or with pleadings and motions, or with the answering brief, as applicable, and evidence forwarded outside these procedural opportunities is not admissible, subject to the exceptions established in the said Article 57(2) (namely, force majeure, grave impediment or in the case of a supervening fact – that is, one that occurred after the said procedural moments). Cf. Case of the Barrios Family v. Venezuela. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 24, 2011. Series C No. 237, paras. 17 and 18, and Case of Deras García et al. v. Honduras. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of August 25, 2022. Series C No. 462, para. 31. 21 During the public hearing, the Court’s judges asked the parties to include in their final arguments information on: (a) the actual situation of the alleged victims who were sentenced to imprisonment; (b) details of the actions taken by the State to investigate the alleged acts of torture from 2003 to date; (c) information on the training courses provided for members of the police and the prosecution service; (d) information identifying the alleged victims who were presented before the media during the press conference held following the raids. With his final written arguments, representative Jemio Mendoza presented a medical report on the health of alleged victim Patricia Gallardo; certification from the Judicial Registration System concerning the calculation of the sentence served by Patricia Gallardo; incidental plea for parole presented by Patricia Gallardo; request for indication of date and time of hearing to consider the incidental plea for parole; certification of prison stay and conduct of Patricia Gallardo; resolution No. 063/2022 of the La Paz Departmental Court of Justice, Second Court for Execution of Sentence ordering a warrant for the arrest of Patricia Gallardo; resolution No. 194/2022 of the Departmental Court of Justice, Second Criminal Chamber, confirming resolution No. 063/2022; resolution No. 19/2022 of the Criminal Chamber deciding the application for release filed by Catalina Gallardo. He also asked the Court to admit, as documentary evidence, the Ombudsman’s Report “Límites en la Implementación del Sistema Único de Salud,” available at https://www.defensoria.gob.bo/uploads/files/informe-defensorial-limites-en-la-implementacion-del-sistema-unicode-salud.pdf. In addition, with his brief with final arguments, representative Gómez Rojas submitted copies of newspaper articles mentioning and identifying several of the alleged victims during the press conference held after the raids. Lastly, with its final arguments, the State presented the file on Investigation LPZ 1006147 concerning the complaint of abuse and torture; record of the statement made by J.V.V. on February 17, 2020, in the investigation into abuse and torture; note PGE-SPDRLE-DGDDHMA No. 101/2022 sent to the Vice Minister for Health Insurances and Management of the Integrated Health System requesting the inclusion of alleged victim Víctor Manuel Boggiano in the Integrated Health System; note PGE-SPDRLE-DGDDHMA No. 100/2022 sent to the Director General for Migration requesting his collaboration to provide alleged victim Víctor Manuel Boggiano with an identity document; letter from Patricia Gallardo Ardúz to the PGE [Attorney General] of May 17, 2021; Order MINGOP/DESP. Ref. No. 034/2021 on implementation of human rights and gender perspective training programs; Report PGE-UC-INF- 11