14 evaluating victims of torture, an expert witness proposed by the representatives, who deposed on the following aspects: i) “the results of a psychological evaluation made on Messrs. Montiel and Cabrera, detailing the persistent effects of the violations which they [allegedly] suffered,” and ii) the results of the evaluations made to some of the relatives of Messrs. Montiel Flores and Cabrera García, in order to evidence the affectations caused by the alleged violations of human rights suffered by the alleged victims; 11) José Quiroga, co-founder and medical director of the Rehabilitation Program for Victims of Torture in Los Angeles, California, and Vice President of the International Council for the Rehabilitation of Victims of Torture, an expert witness proposed by the representatives, who deposed on the following aspects: i) “an evaluation of the physical health of [Messrs. Cabrera and Montiel], detailing the [alleged] persistent effects of torture and other violations of human rights [allegedly] suffered”, and 12) Carlos Castresana Fernández, a former Commissioner of the International Commission against Impunity in Guatemala (ICAIG) and former Attorney of the High Court of Spain, expert witness proposed by the Inter-American Commission, who deposed on the following aspects: i) “[the] principle of immediacy in criminal procedural matter;” ii) “how to obtain confessions by cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or torture,” and iii) “the validity of such confessions as evidence in judicial proceedings.” 26. As to the evidence produced at the public hearing, the Court heard the testimonies rendered by the following people: 1) Rodolfo Montiel Flores, alleged victim, witness proposed by the representatives, who deposed on the following aspects: i) “his work as a forest advocate, describing the organizational process of [OCESP] to stop the [alleged] excessive felling in the region by transnational and local companies;” ii) “the context of attacks against members of OCESP in the 90s;” iii) the alleged “specific violations [allegedly] suffered by him and by Mr. Teodoro Cabrera[,] as from May 1999” and “the effect of such [alleged] violations on his physical and psychological health;” iv) “the [alleged] affectations to his family members resulting from such facts,” and v) “the measures that the State should adopt to repair this damage;” 2) Fernando Coronado Franco, a specialist in Mexican criminal law and general consultant of the Human Rights Commission of the Federal District, expert witness presented by the representatives, who deposed on the following aspects: i) “how the Mexican legal framework [allegedly] allowed and allows for granting evidentiary value to depositions and confessions given without judicial control;” ii) “the practical effects of the legal framework on the actions of the prosecution and judicial authorities,” making comments on the most important domestic jurisprudence about this matter; iii) “the [alleged] practice of […] arbitrary and unlawful detentions and the [alleged] lack of adequate controls in the chain of custody and bringing detainees [before the judges]; iv) “the [alleged] practice of omission or forgery of data on official medical certificates issued in relation to the detainees;” v) the alleged distance between the design of the rules of the Mexican criminal proceedings and recurrent practices; vi) “how the written nature of Mexican criminal proceedings, their investigative aspects and broad powers of the [P]ublic [P]rosecutor’s Office, [apparently] enable and encourage making up proceedings and granting evidentiary value to evidence or proceedings obtained without adequate control[, and] without investigating any report on torture made by individuals accused in criminal