whole body of evidence, the observations of the parties, and the rules of sound judicial discretion. 31. Also, the representatives forwarded several documents as evidence with their final written arguments; these had been requested by the Court based on the provisions of Article 58(b) of the Court’s Rules of Procedure (supra paras. 13). Accordingly, they are also incorporated and the pertinent parts will be assessed, taking into account the whole body of evidence, the observations of the parties, and the rules of sound judicial discretion. 32. Lastly, the Court adds the following domestic norms to the body of evidence, under Article 45(1) of the Rules of Procedure and finding them useful for deciding the case: the Internal Rules of Procedure of the Supreme Court of Justice23 and the Reform of the Ethics Code for Venezuelan Judges.24 In addition, regarding an argument of the State on legal doctrine as a source of international law (infra para. 91), the book entitled, “La Convención Americana: teoría y jurisprudencia - vida, integridad personal, libertad personal, debido proceso y recurso judicial [The American Convention: theory and case law - life, personal integrity, personal liberty, due process and judicial remedy] was added to the case file.25 3. Admission of the testimonial and expert evidence 33. Regarding the statement made before notary public by expert witness Antonio Canova González and the testimony given by alleged victim Mercedes Chocrón Chocrón and witness Jesús Ollarves during the public hearing, the Court admits them and finds them pertinent to the extent that they are in keeping with the purpose defined by the President of the Court in his Order to receive them (supra para. 8) and the purpose of this case, taking into account the observations made by the parties. 34. Pursuant to the Court’s case law, the testimony of alleged victims cannot be assessed in isolation, but must be examined together with the rest of the evidence in the proceedings, because it is useful insofar as it can provide further information on the alleged violations and their consequences.26 The Court will bear this in mind when assessing the testimony of the alleged victim in this case. 35. Furthermore, the Court notes that neither the representatives nor the State submitted observations on the opinion rendered before notary public by Mr. Canova González (supra para. 10). 23 Cf. Internal Rules of Procedure of the Supreme Court of Justice of March 8, 2006. Available [in Spanish] at: http://www.SCJ.gov.ve/informacion/acuerdos/reglamentoSCJ.htm (last accessed on June 1, 2011). 24 Cf. Reform of the Ethics Code for Venezuelan Judges as published in Official Gazette No. 39,493 of August 23, 2010, available [in Spanish] at: http://150.188.8.226/cgi-win/be_alex.exe?Documento= T020700038334/1&Nombrebd=bibconsulta&term_termino_2=%5C%5C192.168.215.23/pgr/alexandr/db /bibpgr/edocs/2010/39493.pdf&term_termino_3=&term_termino_5=pdf&term_termino_4=%20112&For Reg=http://150.188.8.226/light/pruebagaceta/gaceta1.htm&TiposDoc=S (last accessed on June 1, 2011). 25 Cf. Cecilia Medina Quiroga, “La Convención Americana: teoría and jurisprudencia - vida, integridad personal, libertad personal, debido proceso and recurso judicial,” Santiago, Human Rights Center of the Law School, Universidad de Chile, available at: http://www.iidh.ed.cr/BibliotecaWeb/ Varios/Documentos/BD_1231064373/La%20Convencion%20Americana.pdf?url=%2FBibliotecaWeb%2FV arios%2FDocumentos%2FBD_1231064373%2FLa+Convencion+Americana.pdf (last accessed June 1, 2011). 26 Cf. Case of Loayza Tamayo. Merits, supra note 21, para. 43; Case of Cabrera García and Montiel Flores, supra note 16, para. 39; Case of Gelman v. Uruguay. Merits and reparations. Judgment of February 24, 2011, Series C No. 221, para. 40, and Case of Vera Vera et al. v. Ecuador, supra note 19, para. 23. 11