21 and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment41 and a Resolution issued on March 24, 2010 by the Federal Institute for Access to Public Information whereby it was ordered to publish the report by said Sub-Committee.42 50. The State alleged that such documents “do not have any relation whatsoever with the litigation in this matter,” “nor do they provide any element at all” to “facilitate adjudication of this international contentious proceeding.” The State further alleged that such reports do not include any statement “about a systematic and repeated practice of torture” in Mexico. Regarding the Final Observations of the Committee on Human Rights, the State pointed out that it does not make “reference to the case of Messrs.” Cabrera and Montiel “or to any other specific case.” Regarding the report by the Sub-Committee for the Prevention of Torture, the State alleged that “it was only limited to detect any possible risk factors for the commission of torture” by “visiting some detention centers” and “not drawing conclusions on the situation of all detention centers” in Mexico. Particularly, the State highlighted that the Sub-Committee “did not make its study in Guerrero state and, least of all, in the detention centers to which the alleged victims in this case were sent.” 51. The Court has used several rulings of the Committees and other oversight mechanisms of the United Nations System as applicable for a certain case. This is related to the merits of each specific case and the Tribunal does not have any formal restriction to include information in the case file that refers to notorious facts or to facts of public knowledge. Hence, the Court includes these documents not as supervening evidence but as information considered complementary and useful according to article 47 of the Rules of Procedure. The Tribunal emphasizes that there was a contradiction between the parties in relation to such rulings and shall consider the information indicated therein as applicable for this case and taking into account the arguments put forward by the State regarding the content of such documents. VI PRIOR CONSIDERATIONS 1. Facts that were not included in the Commission's application 52. The representatives alleged that Messrs. Cabrera y Montiel were “unlawfully and arbitrarily detained, and later tortured” “due to their activism” in defense of the environment. They specified that these attacks “cannot be anything but a reprisal due to their environmental activism.” Additionally, the representatives indicated that this reprisal was part of a pattern of attacks against environmental defenders and, in particular, against the Civil Association Organization of Environmentalist Peasants of the Sierra of Petatlán and Coyuca of Catalán (Organización de Campesinos Ecologistas de la Sierra de Petatlán y Coyuca de Catalán, hereinafter “the OEPSP”). As from that, according to the representatives, “the military officers of the zone had information about the whereabouts” of Mr. Montiel Flores and his companions. The representatives indicated, furthermore, that “[t]he way in which the detention occurred, the physical and mental abuse to which Messrs. Cabrera and Montiel were subjected, the extension of their detention 41 United Nations. Subcommittee for the Prevention of Torture. Report on the visit to Mexico of the Subcommittee for the Prevention of Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatments. Doc, ONU CAT/OP/MEXIR.1, May 27, 2009. 42 Federal Institute for Access to Public Information (IFAI). Petitioner: Edgar Cortez Morales. Agency before which it filed its request: Foreign Affairs Secretary. Page of request 0000500121909, Case file 5290/09. Resolution of session held on March 24, 2010.