43 United Nations High Commissioner on Human Rights on the situation of human rights in Colombia of 1998, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005; the Economic and Social Council, Report of the Special Rapporteur on adequate housing as a component of the right to an adequate standard of living, E/CN.4/2005/48, 3 March 2005; Final observations of the Committee on the Rights of the Child: Colombia, 16/10/2000, CRC/C/15/Add.137, twenty-fifty session, Committee on the Rights of the Child; Report of the Special Representative of the Secretary General for Children and Armed Conflict. The United Nations General Assembly document A/54/430 of 1 October 1999; Report of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights on the Demobilization Process in Colombia issued on December 13, 2004, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.120 Doc. 60; Displaced Persons’ Register, accumulated number of persons displaced up until August 31, 2005; Alto Comisionado para la Paz en Colombia, Diálogos y Negociación, Grupos de Autodefensa; Informe Anual de Derechos Humanos y Derecho Internacional Humanitario 2002 [High Commissioner for Peace in Colombia, Dialogue and Negotiation, Self-Defense Groups: Annual Report on Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law, 2002] and Avances Período Presidencial 2003 [Progress during the Presidential Mandate, 2003], issued by the Ministry of National Defense of the Republic of Colombia; and expert opinion of Federico Andreu given before the Inter-American Court during the public hearing in the “Mapiripán Massacre” case on March 7, 2005. Assessment of the testimonial and expert evidence 124. Regarding the statements made by the witnesses proposed by the Commission, the representatives and the State, and the expert witnesses proposed by the Commission and the State (supra para. 111), the Court admits them to the extent they are in keeping with the purpose established by the President in the order of July 28, 2005 (supra para. 23), and gives them probative value, bearing in mind the observations made by the parties. This Court considers that the testimony of the persons who were convened to the public hearing in this case (supra paras. 42) must be assessed together with all the evidence in the case and not in isolation since they are alleged victims and have a direct interest in the case. VIII PROVEN FACTS 125. Based on the State’s acknowledgement of responsibility (supra paras. 19, 59, 63 and 64) and in accordance with the body of evidence in this case, the Court finds that the following facts have been proved:35 The internal armed conflict in Colombia and the illegal armed groups, known as “paramilitary groups” 125(1) Beginning in the 1960s, different guerrilla groups emerged in Colombia and, owing to their activities, the State declared “that public order had been disrupted and national territory was in a state of siege.” In view of this situation, on December 24, 1965, the State issued Legislative Decree No. 3398, which was of a transitory nature, but was adopted as permanent legislation by Act No. 48 of 1968. Articles 25 35 Paragraphs 125(1) to 125(103) of this judgment contain uncontested facts, which the Court considers have been established based on the State’s acknowledgement of responsibility.