allegedly prosecuted; c) the arguments of the representatives regarding the conflict between the right to honor and freedom of expression in the abstract; d) the references of the representatives to the protection of journalistic work,23 and e) the issues raised during the public hearing concerning the “review of the crime of “verbal abuse of the Carabineros”, and the “tendency to use criminal instruments, particularly defamation, especially in cases involving politicians.” In this regard, the Court notes that, although the representatives referred to the foregoing points, their comments are not supported by arguments or claims of violations of conventional rights in the pleadings and motions brief. Therefore, the Court will not take them into consideration. VI EVIDENCE A. Admission of documentary evidence 38. In the instant case, as in others,24 the Court admits the evidentiary value of the documents submitted by the parties and by the Commission at the proper procedural opportunity (supra paras. 1, 7 and 8), which were not challenged or disputed,25 and whose authenticity was not questioned. 39. In its answering brief, the State also mentioned that, among the annexes presented with the pleadings and motions brief, there is an undated brief from 2019 which is already included in the case file through the submission brief presented by the Commission. According to the State, in that brief “the petitioners [made] a presentation to the Commission” and requested that it refer in the abstract to the conflict between the right to freedom of expression and the right to honor. In this regard, the State argued that “part of the documentary evidence provided by the representatives of the alleged victim is not relevant, since it is far removed from the factual framework under analysis in the instant case” and requested that it not be included. The Court notes that the issue raised by the State has already been resolved in the chapter on preliminary considerations (supra para. 37). 40. During the public hearing Mr. Baraona submitted a sworn statement provided by Rosa Flora Muñoz Gibert, a former substitute judge of the Court of Los Muermos, dated June 15, 2022, which was read out at the hearing. Furthermore, in their brief containing final arguments, the representatives again attached said document. For its part, the State objected to the reading of the sworn statement during the hearing and, in its observations on the annex, asked the Court not to admit it. The Court notes that the representatives did not justify or provide reasons for presenting the document containing said statement, pursuant to Article 57 of the Rules of Procedure. On this point, the Court reiterates that evidence submitted Galleguillos Castillo et al. v. Hugo Gutiérrez Galvez, Guarantee Court of Iquique. RUC N° 1310013817-9, RIT N° 5629-2013 (2013); Franco Parisi with Evelyn Matthei, Eighth Court of Guarantee of Santiago. RUC N° 1310033640k, RIT N° 9913-2013 (2013); Michelle Bachelet with Revista Qué Pasa RUC N° 1610019481-7, RIT N° 6028-2016 (2016); Sebastián Dávalos with Tomás Mosciatti Eighth Court of Guarantee of Santiago. RUC N° 1310012252-3, RIT N°3787-2013 (2013). 23 According to the State, it is outside the factual framework as the subject matter of the case has to do with the speech of the alleged victim, who is not a journalist but a lawyer, and is not even part of a journalistic investigation. 24 Cf. Case of Velásquez Rodríguez v. Honduras. Merits Judgment of July 29, 1988. Series C No. 4, para. 140, and Case of Leguizamón Zaván et al. v. Paraguay. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 15, 2022. Series C No. 473, para. 28. 25 In its answer, the State indicated that in their pleadings and motions brief, the representatives added to their annexes a series of documents that are already included in the case file, through the brief of submission of the case presented by the Commission, without specifying the documents. The Court considers that the fact that the documents are repeated in the body of evidence does not affect their admissibility. 12

Select target paragraph3