V. EVIDENCE 21. The Court admits the documents submitted at the appropriate time by the parties and the Commission (Article 57 of the Rules of Procedure), whose admissibility was not contested or objected to, nor whose authenticity was questioned.10 The Court also finds it pertinent to admit the statements rendered at the public hearing and by affidavit, insofar as they are in accordance with the purpose defined by the Order that required them and with the object of the present case.11 22. With respect to the procedural moment for the submission of documentary evidence, pursuant to Article 57(2) of the Rules of Procedure, such evidence must be submitted, in general, along with the briefs of submission of the case, of pleadings and motions, or of response, as appropriate. The Court recalls that evidence submitted outside the appropriate procedural opportunities is not admissible, unless, exceptionally as established in the aforementioned Article 57(2) of the Rules of Procedure, due to, namely, force majeure, serious impediment or if it refers to an event which occurred after the procedural moments indicated.12 23. In accordance with the above, with respect to the documents submitted by the representatives together with their closing arguments,13 the Court clarifies that only those documents that refer to the income and fees that allegedly ceased to be received after the submission of the pleadings and motions will be taken into account. With regard to the documents submitted by the representatives on costs and expenses provided with the final written arguments, the Court will only consider those documents that refer to the costs and expenses incurred during the proceedings before this Court, that is, those incurred after the submission of the pleadings and motions brief. The Court will take into account the observations of the State in this regard, which were requested by the Presidency.14 24. Regarding the documents submitted by the State together with its final arguments,15 the Court notes that three of them were requested by this Court during the public hearing and that the document "Acuerdo Gallo, Careaga, Maluf" was also referenced by the Commission during said hearing. Consequently, the Court admits these four annexes. Case of Velásquez Rodríguez v. Honduras. Merits. Judgment of July 29, 1988. Series C No. 4, para. 140, and Case of Martínez Coronado v. Guatemala. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of May 10, 2019. Series C No. 376, para. 20. 11 The statements were rendered by: Eduardo Rico, Gerardo Ignacio Eugenio Martínez Grijalba and Fernando Daniel Bardinella, proposed by the representatives, and Rodrigo Uprimny Yepes, proposed by the Commission. The object of each statements is set forth in the Order of the President of the Court of July 9, 2018. In that Order, the President requested the statements of one (1) witness and one (1) expert witness proposed by the representatives to be rendered before a notary public (affidavit). 12 Case of Barbani Duarte et al. v. Uruguay. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of October 13, 2011. Series C No. 234, para. 22, and Case of Arrom Suhurt et al. v. Paraguay. Merits. Judgment of May 13, 2019. Series C No. 377, para. 53. 13 These documents consisted of: i) Details of the income that would have been received from 2000 to date; ii) Report from Instituto Previsión Social: Period of August 2017 to July 2018; iii) Bar Association of the Province of Buenos Aires, period of June 2015 to August 2018; iv) Difference between the sum provided by the Inst. Prev. Social and the Bar Association of the Province of Buenos Aires; v) invoices related to lodging expenses, transportation, food and fees of the expert accountant; and vi) receipt of the Certified Public Accountant Fernando Bardinella. 14 The State requested the rejection of the receipt of the public accountant Fernando Bardinella for not explaining the parameters on which he based his fees and for being excessive. 15 These documents consisted of: i) Debates Ley 8085; ii) A.T.E. San Juan Juicio Político; iii) Acuerdo Gallo, Careaga, Maluf, and iv) Gutiérrez, Patricia. Impeachment. 10 -7-