13 including the activities of the alleged victims in this case; iv) the alleged attacks and harassment after the detention and imprisonment of Messrs. Cabrera García and Montiel Flores, and v) the alleged impact of these facts on the “organizational process of OCESP and the capacity of its members to freely associate;” 6) Héctor Magallón Larson, Coordinator of Greenpeace Forest and Jungle Campaign, Mexico, an expert in environmental and deforestation matters, a witness proposed by the representatives, who deposed on the following aspects: i) the “knowledge that Greenpeace-Mexico had on the [alleged] deforestation of the forests in Guerrero state and, particularly, in the region of Sierra de Petatlán and Coyuca de Catalán;” ii) the reasons giving rise to Greenpeace involvement in the campaign to release Messrs. Cabrera García and Montiel Flores; iii) “[the] overview of the [alleged] adversities faced in Mexico by environmental community defenders, stressing the [alleged] lack of protection of peasants and natives struggling to preserve the ecosystems of their communities;” 7) Miguel Carbonell Sánchez, a researcher at Universidad Nacional Autónoma de Mexico [National Autonomous University of Mexico], expert witness proposed by the Inter-American Commission, who deposed on the following aspects: i) “the participation of military justice in the investigation and trial of the crime which are not based on and/or which could be human rights violations;” ii) “the theses of the Mexican Supreme Court of Justice in relation to [the] scope of the application of military justice in Mexico,” and iii) “the constitutional and legal regulation of the scope of application of military justice in Mexico;” 8) Ernesto López Portillo Vargas, an expert on public security, Executive Director of Instituto para la Seguridad y la Democracia A.C. (Institute for Security and Democracy) (Insyde) and Adviser to the Comisión de Derechos Humanos del Distrito Federal (Human Rights Commission of the Federal District), expert proposed by the representatives, who deposed on the following aspects: i) “the security policies implemented by the State […] whereby the armed forces have been [allegedly] involved in public security tasks and the [alleged] lack of adequate domestic or civil controls over the actions of such armed forces;” ii) “the profile that law-enforcement officials should have,” and iii) the minimum necessary control standards to guarantee an adequate rendering of accounts by such entities, the consequences for their actions and the respect for the human rights of the civil population vis-à-vis the lack of adequate control; 9) José Luis Piñeyro, a sociologist and a researcher, Professor at the Sociology Department of Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana Campus Azcapotzalco, an expert witness proposed by the representatives, who deposed on the following aspects: i) “the particular context of militarization in Guerrero [state] ;” ii) “the reason for and the impact of the presence of the Armed Forces on the rural communities of Guerrero and on the peasant movement, highlighting the [alleged] patterns of human rights violations committed against civilians by the military;” iii) “the aspects of the [alleged] militarization in Guerrero which are particular to this [s]tate and that [would be] fundamental to understand the reasons for the military to [allegedly] detain, torture and make up crimes against the [alleged] victims and [how] the facts described occurred;” iv) “the present situation in Guerrero regarding the [alleged] militarization and the impact of the anti-drug fight on rural communities,” and v) “the reparation measures that the Mexican State should adopt in this case;” 10) Ana C. Deutsch, an expert in Clinical Psychology with experience in