by the Commission, not only because it lacks the elements needed to establish this but also because, in addition, that determination exceeds its jurisdiction, which pertains to local justice and that the latter has already made its judgment, dismissing that possibility. 20. The state indicates that the petitioners have not been able to conclusively prove that the alleged violations took place. It states that the only supporting evidence of the petitioners is the expert report drafted by the physicians of the Catholic University of Córdoba which was dismissed in domestic courts. Regarding this expertise, the state points out that it was dismissed in both the criminal case and the civil suit because it was deemed that the conclusions reached by the physicians had been viewed as tainted by partiality not only for having exceeded the limits when describing the conducts and personally disqualifying the other professionals involved in the case, but also for “having based much of their reasoning on unproven data or allegations made only by the plaintiffs in the petition.” 21. The state points out that the following should have been taken into account: a) Ms. Britez Arce started her checkups at the Sardá Mother’s Hospital on March 10, 1992, when she was already 29 weeks pregnant; b) she was examined many times at the checkups without showing any abnormalities; c) the alleged irregularities of medical record No. 309.420 were not substantiated in the domestic court, where it was deemed that they were due to sloppiness and did not reflect the intent to alter a document; d) the family’s decision to not allow an autopsy to be carried out immediately after the death of Ms. Britez Arce made it difficult to determine with certainty the cause of her death. 22. It reiterates that there is no element appearing in the case files that would make it possible to claim that there was a lack of independence and impartiality regarding the judges or courts that acquitted the physicians charged for the death of Cristina Britez or for those charged with falsifying the expertise. It indicates that the petitioners confine themselves to challenging the assessments of the facts and evidence, without being able to prove any violation of due process of law. III. FACTUAL DETERMINATIONS A. The death of Cristina Britez Arce 23. Cristina Britez Arce, 38 years old, mother of Ezequiel Martin Avaro and Vanina Verónica Avaro, at that time 15 and 12 years old respectively, and nine months pregnant at that time,2 appeared at the Hospital Público Sardá on June 1, 1992, at around nine o’clock, claiming she had lower back pain, fever, and sparse loss of fluid from the genitals.3 She was administered an ultrasound scan, which indicated that the fetus was dead, as a result of which she was admitted to the hospital for inducing labor for delivery of the dead fetus.4 According to the death certificate, Cristina Britez Arce died that day from “a non-traumatic cardiopulmonary arrest.”5 B. Domestic proceedings 1. Case No. 2391 entitled Britez Arce Cristina s/manslaughter – Correctional Court No. 8, Secretariat 636 24. On June 15, 1992, Mr. Miguel Ángel Avaro, father of Ezequiel Martin Avaro and Vanina Verónica Avaro, filed a criminal complaint for the death of Cristina Britez Arce, requesting an autopsy of both her and the fetus.7 The complaint requested the suspension of the autopsy because “it had been ordered that experts of the party According to what is indicated in the expert report of May 7, 1997, signed by the physicians Pérez de Pliego, Rodríguez Girault, Aldo Ludueña, and Jarazo Veira. Annex to the initial petition. 3 Appeal court judgment in case 27.985, referring to the medical record. Annex to the initial petition. 4 Appeal court judgment in case 27.985, referring to the medical record. Annex to the initial petition. 5 According to what is indicated in the expert report of May 7, 1997, signed by the physicians Pérez de Pliego, Rodríguez Girault, Aldo Ludueña, and Jarazo Veira. Annex to the initial petition. 6 Being considered by Judge Angela Mónica Braidot and Secretary Sanzone. 7 According to what is indicated in the expert report of May 7, 1997, signed by the physicians Pérez de Pliego, Rodríguez Girault, Aldo Ludueña, and Jarazo Veira. Annex to the initial petition. 2 4