15 military courts in September 1996, and after making a statement to the Procurator General’s Office in the second half of 1997. 17 87. The petitioners filed complaints about these acts before the State authorities on various occasions. On September 11, 1996, the first time that men came to the Vélez Román family home claiming to be from the Procurator General of the Nation's Office, the Chief Editor of Colombia 12:30 notified the Attorney General about this incident. 18 In October 1996, Mr. Vélez and his wife said they informed the Procurator General of the Nation and the National Public Prosecutor’s Office they were receiving threats on a daily basis. 19 On August 27, 1997, Mr. Vélez testified before the National Public Prosecutor on the threats he received as from August 29, 1996 until February 1997. 20 On September 29, 1997, after the threats resumed, the Colombian Commission of Jurists brought Mr. Vélez and his family's situation of risk to the attention of the Procurator General of the Nation and the Presidential Council for Human Rights. 21 On October 3, 1997, Mr. Vélez visited the COPDH to reiterate his complaints. 22 Mr. Vélez also had a meeting with the COPDH and with the Interior Ministry after the attempted kidnapping on October 6, 1996. At this point, the State provided him with protection given the seriousness of the complaints. 23 88. The State of Colombia argued that "the evidence adduced by Mr. Vélez to show that these threats occurred [...] are not decisive or sufficient to show the existence of the alleged threats and intimidation". 24 In this respect, the IACHR points out that the international protection of human rights should not be confused with the criminal justice system, and recalls that the standards of proof are less formal than those which exist in the domestic legal systems. 25 International tribunals have ample means to examine and evaluate evidence, in accordance with the rules of logic and based on experience, without being subject to the rules of assessed evidence. 26 Circumstantial evidence, indications and presumptions may be used, so long as conclusions consistent with the In this case, the IACHR makes the corresponding facts may be inferred from them. 27 determinations, observing, according to its practice, that the evidence, inter alia, the statements, coincide with each other, and that there are other pieces of evidence supporting them, and in 17 Initial Petition received on July 29, 2005, pp. 13-14. 18 Initial Petition received on July 29, 2005, p. 12; Annex 30, Hans Sarmiento's Letter, Chief Editor, Noticias Colombia Program, to Dr. Ramón Alberto Puentes, National Director of Special Investigations, Procurator General of the Nation's Office, September 11, 1996. 19 Initial Petition received on July 29, 2005, p. 13. 20 Petitioners’ Brief received on September 8, 2010, Annex 2, National Public Prosecutor, Statement of Luis Gonzalo Vélez Restrepo, August 27, 1997. 21 See Petitioners’ Brief received on October 4, 2006, Annex, Procurator General of the Nation, Human Rights Unit of the National Department of Special Investigations, October 10, 1997. See Petitioners’ Brief received on September 8, 2010, Annex 5, President's Office, Department for Human Rights, Letter to Gustavo Gallon in sua sponte reply of September 29, 1997, October 14, 1997. 22 Initial Petition received on July 29, 2005, p. 15. Fact recognized by the State in its brief received on August 4, 2009, p. 11. 23 Initial Petition received on July 29, 2005, p. 15. Fact recognized by the State in its brief received on August 4, 2009, p. 11. See also Petitioners’ Brief received on September 8, 2010, Annex 6, Interior Ministry, General Department Special Administrative Unit for Human Rights, letter to the Foreign Relations Ministry, November 29, 1997. 24 State’s brief received on August 4, 2009, p. 10. See also p. 12. 25 Cf. I/A Court H.R., Case of Godínez Cruz v Honduras. Merits. Judgment of January 20, 1989. Series C No. 5, paras. 134 and 140. 26 Cf. I/A Court H.R., Case of Perozo et al. v Venezuela. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of January 28, 2009. Series C No. 195, para.112 27 Cf. I/A Court H.R., Case of Perozo et al. v Venezuela. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of January 28, 2009. Series C No. 195, para.112.