21 l) Fernando Coronado Franco. “Expert in Mexican criminal law and international human rights law.” Expert witness proposed by the representatives. He testified, inter alia, about “the role and the actions of the Public Prosecutor’s Office and the Judiciary in the ‘cotton field’ case; the [alleged] main obstacles to access to justice and the development of democratic criminal legislation as a result of the constitutional amendments; the [supposed] impact of these amendments on the laws of the states, including, the State of Chihuahua; the impact of the absence of an accusatory system, and the [alleged] absence of controls over the actions of the [P]ublic [P]rosecutor’s [O]ffice in the Cotton Field case; the factual powers that [supposedly] made it impossible to obtain a successful result in the investigations in the Cotton Field case; the [alleged] absence of effective mechanisms for the protection and promotion of human rights in the Mexican State, and the [alleged] impact of this on both the victims and those who were probably responsible.” m) Elena Azaola Garrido. “[E]xpert in psychology, gender perspective, rights of the child and victimization processes.” Expert witness proposed by the representatives. She testified, inter alia, about “the [supposed] process of victimization of the next of kin of the victims of murder and disappearance related to the Cotton Field case, the [alleged] impact on their lives and the [presumed] harm caused” and about “the [alleged] psychological damage caused to Mrs. Irma Monreal Jaime and her family owing to the [presumed] disappearance and murder of Esmeralda Herrera Monreal, linked to the [alleged] institutional violence they encountered.” n) Marcela Patricia María Huaita Alegre. “[E]xpert on gender violence and the right of women to access to justice.” Expert witness proposed by the representatives. She testified, inter alia, about “the [alleged] problems encountered by the families involved in the ‘cotton field’ case to have access to justice, the [supposed] discriminatory conduct of the authorities when dealing with cases of violence against women, the [alleged] absence of gender policies in the provision and administration of justice, the [supposed] absence of budgets with a gender perspective, [and] the [alleged] absence of state and national strategies to investigate paradigmatic cases of violence against women that could be linked to sexual exploitation or trafficking.” o) Marcela Lagarde y de los Ríos. “[E]xpert in women’s human rights, gender perspective and public policies.” Expert witness proposed by the representatives. She testified, inter alia, about “the [alleged] absence of a gender policy in Ciudad Juárez and Chihuahua, as well as in the rest of the Mexican [S]tate; the [supposed] difficulties that women face to obtain access to services provided by the State, the [supposedly] gender-based discriminatory policies; the [alleged] failure to prevent gender violence; the role of the legislature in the creation of gender policies, the role of the legislature as a body that supervises institutional actions, [and] the different types and methods of violence that women have faced in Ciudad Juárez, specifically the [alleged] victims of disappearance and murder, and their next of kin.” p) Clara Jusidman Rapoport. “Expert in public policies and gender.” Expert witness proposed by the representatives. She testified, inter alia, about