10. Amicus Curiae. - The Court received a brief of amicus curiae filed by the Due Process of Law Foundation ("DPLF").6 11. Final written arguments and observations. - On June 13, 2022, the Inter-American Commission, the representative, and the State submitted their final observations and final arguments, respectively. The representative and the State accompanied their final arguments with annexed documents. On June 24, 2022, the representative and the State submitted, respectively, their comments to the annexes included in the counterpart's final arguments. On the same date, the Commission indicated that it had no observations on the annexes presented. 12. Expenditures in application of the Victims' Legal Assistance Fund. - On September 26, 2022, the State was informed of the expenditures made in application of the Victims' Legal Assistance Fund in this case and, in accordance with Article 5 of the Rules of the Court on the operation of the aforementioned Fund, was granted a period of time to submit any observations it deemed pertinent. On October 7, 2022, the State submitted its observations. 13. Deliberation of the case. - The Court deliberated this Judgment, in virtual form, on November 21, 2022. III JURISDICTION 14. The Court has jurisdiction to hear the instant case, in the terms of Article 62(3) of the Convention, because Paraguay has been a State Party to the Convention since August 24, 1989, and recognized the contentious jurisdiction of this Court on March 11, 1993. IV EVIDENCE A. Admissibility of documentary evidence 15. The Court received numerous documents presented as evidence by the Commission and the parties together with their main briefs (supra para. 1, 6 and 7), which, as in other cases, are admitted on the understanding that they were submitted at the opportune procedural moment (Article 57 of the Rules of Procedure).7 16. The representation of the alleged victim submitted two annexes with her closing arguments: a table with an update of the labor settlement calculation and a copy of the alleged victim's remuneration record. The State, in its observations, argued that "the final arguments stage is not a time that constitutes an opportunity to incorporate 6 The brief was signed by Katya Salazar, Úrsula Indacochea, and Hannah J. Ahern. The brief analyzes the right to freedom of expression of prosecutors and its limitations. In accordance with article 57(2) of the Rules of Procedure, documentary evidence in general may be presented together with the briefs, requests, and arguments or answers the case, as appropriate, and evidence submitted outside of these procedural moments is not admissible except in the exceptions set out in said article 57(2) of the Rules of Procedure (namely, force majeure, serious impediment) or except in the case of a supervening event, meaning one that occurred after the aforementioned procedural moments. Cf. Case of the Barrios Family v. Venezuela. Merits, reparations, and costs. Judgment of November 24, 2011. Series C No. 237, para. 17 and 18, and Case of Mina Cuero v. Ecuador. Preliminary objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of September 7, 2022. Series C No. 462, para. 20. 7 5