30 95. The Court shall admit as evidence the testimonies given by Wilson García-Asto and Pedro Ramírez-Rojas at the public hearing held in the city of Asuncion, Paraguay, on May 10, 2005 (supra paras. 33 and 87), inasmuch as they are in accordance with the purpose established by the President in Order of March 18, 2005 (supra para. 24), and shall assess their contents as part of the whole body of evidence, applying thereto the standards of reasonable credit and weight analysis. As the Court has held, the testimonies of the alleged victims and/or their next of kin are useful insofar as they can supply additional information on the alleged violations and the consequences thereof.17 Furthermore, the Court understands that the testimony of Wilson GarcíaAsto cannot be assessed separately, as it relates to an alleged victim who holds a direct interest in the outcome of the instant case; rather, it should be assessed as part of the whole body of evidence. 96. Therefore, the Court shall assess the evidentiary value of the documents, statements, and expert opinions submitted in writing or produced before the Court. Furthermore, the evidence submitted throughout the stages of these proceedings has been incorporated into the same body of evidence as a whole. VIII PROVEN FACTS 97. In accordance with the acknowledgement made by the State regarding the facts prior to September 2000 (supra paras. 52 to 60) and with the body of evidence produced in the instant case, the Court finds the following facts to be proven:18 Background and legal context 97(1) The Criminal Code of Peru of 1991, enacted by Legislative Decree No. 635 of April 3, 1991, in Title XIV, Crimes against Public Peace, Chapter II, defines the crimes of terrorism (Article 319), aggravated terrorism (Article 320), collaboration with terrorism (Article 321), and membership in and affiliation with a terrorist organization (Article 322), among others criminal offenses. 97(2) Within the framework of the anti-terrorist legislation enacted in Peru, on May 5, 1992, Decree-Law No. 25.475 was enacted. Said decree, which established the “penalties for crimes of terrorism and the procedures regarding the investigation, prosecution, and trial thereof,” defined the crimes of terrorism, collaboration with terrorism, and membership in and affiliation with a terrorist organization, and set forth the procedures for the investigation and trial of such crimes. The above-mentioned Decree repealed Chapter II of the Criminal Code of 1991 (supra para. 97(1)). In the same year Decree-Law No. 25.659 was enacted. Said Decree defined the crime of high treason, describing it as an aggravated form of the crime of terrorism as provided in 17 Cf. Case of the “Mapiripán Massacre”, supra note 2, para. 81; Case of Raxcacó-Reyes, supra note 10, para. 39, and Case of Gutiérrez-Soler, supra note 6, para. 45. 18 Paragraphs 97(1) to 97(28), 97(53) to 97(55), 97(60) to 97(63), 97(67) to 97(86), 97(120) to 97(125), and 97(131) to 97(137) of this Judgment are undisputed facts which the Court deems to be established on the grounds of the acknowledgment made by the State regarding the facts prior to September 2000.