B. Admissibility of the statements offered 32. This Court finds it pertinent to admit the statements made by affidavit78 and during the public hearing,79 to the extent that they are in keeping with the purpose defined by the President in the order requiring them and the purpose of this case. 33. The State asked the Court to exclude from its analysis the “brief submitted by Dr. Ortiz on April 9, 2021, because it was time-barred.” It argued that the fact that this brief was timebarred had had “a disproportionate impact on the State’s right to defense because it had not be granted adequate time to contest the evidence.” 34. In this regard, the Court recalls that the President’s order required those called on to provide expert opinions during the hearing to provide a written version of their opinion by March 4, 2021, at the latest, if they considered this appropriate.80 On April 9, 2021, expert witness Guillermo Antonio Ortiz Avendaño forwarded a written version of his opinion. The Court notes that Mr. Ortiz did not justify the belated presentation of the written version of his opinion, and neither did the representatives submit any reasons for the delay. Consequently, the Court considers that the written version of the expert opinion of Guillermo Ortiz was timebarred and is therefore inadmissible and will only consider the opinion that he rendered during the public hearing. VII FACTS A. Factual framework 35. In 1998, a new Criminal Code entered into force in El Salvador which eliminated the grounds for non-punishable abortion,81 and also the classification as mitigated homicide for Cf. Affidavit made by Manuela’s mother on March 5, 2021 (evidence file, folios 3789 to 3794); affidavit made by Manuela’s father on February 26, 2021 (evidence file, folios 3796 to 3801); affidavit made by Manuela’s elder son on February 26, 2021 (evidence file, folios 3803 to 3805); affidavit made by Manuela’s younger son on February 26, 2021 (evidence file, folios 3806 to 3807); affidavit made by María Teresa Rivera on February 23, 2021 (evidence file, folios 3809 to 3811); affidavit made by María Marina Pérez on February 26, 2021 (evidence file, folios 3813 to 3815); affidavit made by Johana Iris Rosa Gutiérrez on February 22, 2021 (evidence file, folios 3817 to 3819); affidavit made by Ena Vinda Munguía on February 22, 2021 (evidence file, folios 3820 to 3822); affidavit made by Alba Lorena Rodríguez on February 24, 2021 (evidence file, folios 3823 to 3825); affidavit made by Teodora del Carmen Vásquez on March 3, 2021 (evidence file, folios 3827 to 3829); expert opinion provided by affidavit by José Mario Nájera Ochoa on March 5, 2021 (evidence file, folios 3830 to 3857); expert opinion provided by affidavit by Verónica Undurraga on March 5, 2021 (evidence file, folios 3859 to 3891); expert opinion provided by David Ernesto Morales Cruz on March 4, 2021 (evidence file, folios 3893 to 3986); expert opinion provided by Alba Evelyn Cortez on March 5, 2021 (evidence file, folios 3988 to 4008), and expert opinion provided by Oscar A. Cabrera on March 6, 2021 (evidence file, folios 4015 to 4050). 78 Cf. Statements made by Guillermo Antonio Ortiz Avendaño and Laura Clérico, during the public hearing held in this case, and written version of the expert opinion of Laura Clérico of March 10, 2021 (evidence file, folios 4050 to 4111). 79 80 Cf. Case of Manuela et al. v. El Salvador. Call to a hearing. Order of the President of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of December 2, 2020, first operative paragraph. Article 169 of the 1973 Criminal Code established that: “The following are non-punishable: (1) Culpable selfinduced abortion or attempted abortion; (2) Abortion performed by a doctor to save the life of the mother, if there is no other suitable measure, and performed with the consent of the woman and following a prior medical opinion. If the women should be a minor, incapable or unable to give her consent, the consent of her spouse, legal representative or a close relative shall be necessary; (3) The abortion performed by a doctor, when it is presumed that the pregnancy is the result of a crime of rape and it shall be performed with the woman’s consent, and (4) Abortion performed by a doctor with the woman’s consent when the purpose is to avoid a probable severe deformity of the fetus.” Legislative Assembly of the Republic of El Salvador. Criminal Code, Legislative Decree No. 270 of February 13, 1973, article 169. Available at: https://oig.cepal.org/sites/default/files/1973_decreto270 codigopenal_el_salvador.pdf 81 16