23 Paraguay is one of the countries where the justice system and the courts are used as a mechanism for curtailing the right to information. In Paraguay, some newspaper directors have been sued repeatedly. C) EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT Documentary Evidence Assessment 61. In this case, as in others,14 the Court accepts the probative value of the documents presented by the parties at the proper procedural opportunity or as helpful evidence, that were not contested or opposed, and whose authenticity was not questioned. 62. With regard to the sworn written statements of the two witnesses proposed by the Commission and the representatives (supra paras. 32, 33 and 58) and the sworn written statements made before public notary by the three witnesses and expert witness proposed by the State (supra paras. 31 and 59) in response to the decision of the President in the Order of February 27, 2004 (supra para. 29), the Court admits them insofar as they correspond to the purpose defined by the Court and assesses them with the body of evidence, applying the rules of healthy criticism. 63. In accordance with Article 44(3) of its Rules of Procedure, the Court admits the copy of decision and judgment No. 1362 delivered by the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice of Paraguay on December 11, 2002, and submitted by both the representatives (supra para. 22) and the State (supra para. 23), and also the copy of decision and judgment No. 804, delivered by the said Criminal Chamber on April 27, 2004, submitted by the State (supra para. 37), because they are supervening evidence. 64. The Court considers that the documents presented by the State on April 29, 2004, during the public hearing on merits and possible reparations and costs are helpful (supra paras. 38, 39 and 56); also those presented by the representatives of the alleged victim in their final written arguments (supra paras. 42 and 52); particularly as they were not contested or opposed, and their authenticity was not questioned, so they are added to the body of evidence. 65. With respect to the press articles presented by the parties, this Court has considered that, even though they are not documentary evidence stricto sensu, they can be assessed when they refer to well-known public and notorious facts, or statements by State officials, or corroborate aspects of the instant case.15 Testimonial and Expert Evidence Assessment 66. With regard to the statement made by the alleged victim in the instant case (supra paras. 38 and 60(a)), the Court admits it to the extent that it corresponds to the purpose of the examination established by the President in the Order of February 27, 2004 (supra para. 29). In this respect, the Court considers that, as he is the 14 Cf. Case of the Gómez-Paquiyauri brothers, supra note 2, para. 50; the Case of 19 Merchants, supra note 2, para. 73; and Case of Molina-Theissen. Reparations, supra note 2, para. 31. 15 Cf. Case of the Gómez-Paquiyauri brothers, supra note 2, para. 51; Case of Herrera-Ulloa. Judgment of July 2, 2004. Series C No. 107, para. 71; and Case of Myrna Mack-Chang. Judgment of November 25, 2003. Series C No. 101, para. 131.