6 13. On September 25, 2006, the Inter-American Commission9 requested that the Court order provisional measures on behalf of Gloria Giralt de García Prieto, José Mauricio García Prieto Hirlemann, María de los Ángeles García Prieto de Charur, José Benjamín Cuéllar Martínez, Matilde Guadalupe Hernández de Espinoza, Paulino Espinoza and José Roberto Burgos Viale, such that the State “adopt all measures necessary to guarantee the life and personal integrity of the beneficiaries [...].” On September 26, 2006, the Court ordered the State, inter alia, to immediately adopt the measures necessary to protect the life and personal integrity of these individuals, with the exception of Paulino Espinoza, husband of Matilde Guadalupe Hernández. 14. On November 29, 2006, CEJIL and IDHUCA requested that the Court order provisional measures on behalf of Ricardo Alberto Iglesias Herrera based on the allegation that he "suffered an attempt on his life and personal integrity" and that he had been offered by them as an expert witness in the present case. On December 3, 2006, the President ordered that the State adopt urgent measures on his behalf. On January 27, 2006, the Court ordered the State, inter alia, to maintain the measures necessary to protect the life and personal integrity of the beneficiaries of the provisional measures indicated in the preceding paragraph, and to broaden the measures to guarantee the life and personal integrity of Ricardo Alberto Iglesias Herrera. IV EVIDENCE 15. In accordance with Articles 44 and 45 of the Rules of Procedure, as well as the Court’s jurisprudence regarding evidence and its assessment, the Court will now proceed to examine and assess the documentary evidence offered by the Commission, the common intervener, and the State at different times during the proceedings, as well as evidence in order to facilitate adjudication of the case requested by the President. The Court will also examine and assess the testimony of witnesses and expert witness opinions rendered through affidavits and before the Court during the public hearing convened for the present case. For this purpose, the Tribunal will employ the rules of competent analysis, within the corresponding legal framework.10 A) WRITTEN, ORAL, AND EXPERT TESTIMONY 16. Expert and lay testimony was rendered by affidavit by the following individuals: a) José Mauricio García Prieto Hirlemann, presented by both the Commission and the common intervener, is the father of Ramón Mauricio 9 The Inter-American Commission adopted cautionary measures on June 20, 1997, which were reaffirmed on November 20, 2001. 10 Cf. Case of the “White Van” (Paniagua-Morales et al.) v. Guatemala. Merits. Judgment of March 8, 1998. Series C No. 37, para. 76; Case of Cantoral Huamaní and García Santa Cruz v. Perú. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of July 4, 2007. Series C No. 167, para. 32; and Case of Zambrano Véles et al. v. Colombia. Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of July 4, 2007. Series C No. 166, para. 22.