15 In relation to Ricardo Abarca Ayala: Petronila Abarca Alvarado (mother), Daniel Ayala Abarca (brother), José Humberto Abarca Ayala (brother), Ester Abarca Ayala (sister), Osmín Abarca Ayala (brother) and Paula Alvarado (grandmother). 35. In sum, the State’s acknowledgment of responsibility constitutes a total acceptance of the facts which, pursuant to Articles 62 and 64 of the Court’s Rules of Procedure, produces full juridical effects as well as a partial acknowledgment of international responsibility. Considering the serious nature of the facts and of the alleged violations, the Court will now proceed to establish the facts that generated the State’s responsibility, together with the context in which they occurred, in order to contribute to the reparation of the victims, avoid the repetition of similar facts and to satisfy the purposes of the Inter-American jurisdiction on human rights.27 36. Finally, the Court emphasizes the importance of the apology made by the State to the victims of forced disappearance and to their next of kin, which has a high symbolic value in terms of preventing the repetition of similar facts, and ensuring that the State remains committed to implementing the necessary measures of reparation in permanent dialogue with the representatives and under the criteria established by the Court. All these actions make a positive contribution to this proceeding, to the effectiveness of the principles that inspire the American Convention28 and, in part, to the satisfaction of the need to provide redress to the victims of human rights violations. 29 V EVIDENCE 37. Based on the provisions of Articles 46 to 52 and 57 to 59 of the Rules of Procedure, as well as on its case law concerning evidence and its assessment,30 the Court will examine the probative elements submitted by the parties on different occasions during the proceedings, the statements, testimony and expert opinions rendered by affidavit and received during the public hearing, as well as helpful evidence requested by the Court. It Court will subsequently assess these, establish the proven facts and rule on the merits and the possible reparations, taking into account the entire body of evidence and the observations of the parties. To this end, the Court will adhere to the principles of sound judicial discretion within the applicable legal framework.31 A. Documentary, testimonial and expert evidence 38. The Court received different documents presented as evidence by the Inter-American Commission and the representatives, together with their main briefs (supra paras. 1 and 5). The Court Osorio Rosales, brother of María de los Ángeles Osorio, mother of Manuel Antonio Bonilla. Given that in its answer the State acknowledged its responsibility based on the merits report that establishes that said persons are the uncle and aunt of Manuel Antonio Bonilla, the Court will consider them as such. Cf. Case of Tiu Tojín v. Guatemala. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 26, 2008. Series C No. 190, para. 26, and Case of Gutiérrez and Family v. Argentina, supra, para. 22. 27 28 Cf. Case of the Caracazo v. Venezuela. Merits. Judgment of November 11, 1999. Series C No. 58, para. 43, and Case of García Cruz and Sánchez Silvestre v. Mexico. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 26, 2013. Series C No. 273, para. 23. Cf. Case of Manuel Cepeda Vargas v. Colombia, supra, para. 18, and Case of Gutiérrez and Family v. Argentina, supra, para. 27. 29 Cf. Case of the “White Van” (Paniagua Morales et al.) v. Guatemala. Merits. Judgment of March 8, 1998. Series C No. 37, paras. 69 to 76, and Case of the Human Rights Defender et al. v. Guatemala. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of August 28, 2014. Series C No. 283, para. 51. 30 Cf. Case of the “White Van” (Paniagua Morales et al.) v. Guatemala. Merits, supra, para. 76, and Case of the Human Rights Defender et al. v. Guatemala, supra, para. 51. 31