-62018, said documentation was transmitted to the State and to the Commission, indicating that they could submit observations in this regard in the final oral or written arguments. The Court notes that the documentation presented was requested by the representatives from the Supreme Electoral Tribunal on November 27, 2017, and January 26, 2018,10 which responded on January 5 and May 15, 2018.11 This means that the representatives did not have access to it at the time of submitting the pleadings and motions brief, and for this reason, the Court considers that it should be admitted. 16. On the other hand, together with the final written arguments, the State presented certain additional documentation to that requested as evidence to facilitate adjudication of the case. This Court notes that annexes 3, 4, 5, and 6 were already part of the file, for which it does not consider it necessary to make a separate ruling on the Admission of the copies provided together with the final written arguments.12 Meanwhile, as to annexes 10, 11, and 16, the Court considers that the State has not justified making its submission of the answering brief after the appropriate procedural moment.13 Consequently, said evidence is time-barred and, in accordance with Article 57(2) of the Rules of Procedure, it is not admissible to the body of evidence in this case. 17. Finally, on January 22, 2019, the State forwarded additional documentation provided by the Supreme Electoral Tribunal,14 which was transmitted that same day to the representatives and to the Commission and they were given a deadline of January 31, 2019 to submit observations. The Court notes that no arguments were presented on the Admission of this evidence. Taking into account that said documentation complements what was requested by the representatives to the Supreme Electoral Tribunal, sent by them on May 22, 2018 (supra para 15), the Court considers that it should be admitted. B. Admission of testimonial and expert evidence 18. The Court heard the statement of the alleged victim, Eduardo Colindres Schonenberg, given in a public hearing. This Court finds it pertinent to admit this statement, insofar as it keeps with the purpose that was defined by the President in the order requiring it to be received and in keeping with the purpose of this case. Development and the Head of the Department of Administrative Services of the TSE in relation to information on former judge Mártir Arnoldo Marín, and (iii) certifications of the agreements adopted by the TSE approving the official missions to Mr. Marín during the period between 1998 and 1999 (Merits file, folios 170 to 184). 10 Cf. Communication from the representatives of November 27, 2017 (evidence file, folios 1495 and 1496), and communication of the representatives of January 26, 2018 (merits file, folio 165). 11 Cf. Communication of the Supreme Electoral Tribunal of January 5, 2018 (merits file, folio 169), and communication of the Supreme Electoral Tribunal of May 15, 2018 (merits file, folio 167). 12 Annex 3 to the final written arguments of the State corresponds to a copy of the judgment of the cassation 02-C-200 1, of December 22, 2009, regarding the claim for damages filed by Mr. Eduardo Benjamín Colindres. On the other hand, Annex 4 corresponds to a copy of Legislative Agreement No. 281, by which a Commission was formed to issue an informational guidance that would guarantee Mr. Eduardo Benjamín Colindres the right to a hearing. Attachment 5 consists of a copy of the Commission's agreement granting a hearing to Mr. Colindres. Finally, annex 6 corresponds to a copy of the brief submitted to the Special Commission of the Legislative Assembly by Mr. Eduardo Benjamín Colindres. 13 Annex 10 to the final written arguments of the State contains a certificate issued by the Secretary General of the Supreme Electoral Tribunal regarding the election of Mr. Colindres Schonenberg as principal representative of the Legislative Assembly in the elections held on March 17, 1991. For its part, Appendix 11 consists of a copy of the testimony of the public deed notarizing the Minutes of the Extraordinary National Convention of the Christian Democratic Party (PDC), held on September 11, 1994. Finally, annex 16 corresponds to a copy of a note dated February 13, 1992, signed by the Secretary General of the Christian Democratic Party, addressed to the President of the Legislative Assembly, which proposes issues for principal and substitute judges of the Supreme Electoral Tribunal. 14 The State provided a copy of the payment statements corresponding to the months of November and December 1996, January to November 1997, and June 1998 to July 1999, which were “located in the Supreme Electoral Tribunal's file” (merits file, folios 369 to 397).