26 60. Regarding the documentation and information requested repeatedly from the State as helpful evidence, and which it did not submit (supra paras. 19 and 23), the Court recalls that the parties should provide the Court with the evidence it requests. The Commission, the representatives and the State must provide all the probative elements requested, so that the Court has as much evidence as possible to enable it to consider the facts and to justify its decisions. VIII PROVEN FACTS 61. Having examined the probative elements in the case file, the statements of the parties, and the State’s acknowledgement of international responsibility, the Court finds that the following facts have been proved: Concerning the context of the dictatorship of General Alfredo Stroessner Matiauda11 61(1) General Alfredo Stroessner’s dictatorship in Paraguay began with a coup d’état in 1954 and lasted 35 years, until a military coup headed by his son’s father-in law, General Andrés Rodríguez. Shortly afterwards, Stroessner fled to Brazil. 61(2) The dictatorship was characterized by a “permanent state of siege,” because the Constitution empowered the Executive Power to renew it every 90 days. This state of siege created “a climate of insecurity and fear that clearly impaired respect for human rights.” 61(3) During the dictatorship, there was a systematic practice of arbitrary detention, prolonged imprisonment without trial, torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, death during torture, and the political assassination of individuals who were said to be “subversive” or against the regime. 61(4) Regarding the guarantees of due process for the investigation and sanction of human rights violations during the dictatorship in Paraguay, the courts of justice usually refused to receive and process applications for habeas corpus in relation to measures decreed by the Executive Power under the state of siege. The existence of the state of siege for almost 33 years, the impairment of non-derogable rights and the absence of judicial recourses for the individual to confront the President’s powers 11 Paragraphs 61(1) to 61(4) “concerning the context of the dictatorship of General Alfredo Stroessner Matiauda” correspond to facts that are found to have been proved based on the following documents: the book Testimonio contra el Olvido; Reseña de la Infamia y el Terror, Paraguay 1954-1989, Comité de Iglesias para Ayudas de Emergencia & CDyA (Centro de Documentación y Archivo para la Defensa de los Derechos Humanos), material authorized by the Supreme Court of Justice, 1999; the book Es mi informe. Los archivos secretos de la Policía de Stroessner, Alfredo Boccia, Myrian A. González and Rosa Palau Aguilar, Centro de Documentación y Estudios, Asunción, 1994; Report of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights on the Situation of Human Rights in Paraguay, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.43 doc. 13 corr. 1, January 31, 1978; Annual Report of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights 1979-1980, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.50, Doc. 13, rev. 1, October 2, 1980, Chapter V, B.3 and Recommendation (a); Annual Report of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights 1981-1982, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.57, doc. 6, rev. 1, September 20, 1982, Chapter I and Chapter V, Paraguay, 1 and 2; Report of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights on the Situation of Human Rights in Paraguay, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.71 Doc. 19 rev. 1, September 28, 1987, Chapter I, B.3 and Chapter II, and Decision concerning Paraguay within the framework of the procedure set out in Resolution 1503 (XLVIII) of the Economic and Social Council. E/CN.4/2004/127.