B. Considerations of the Court 1. Request to increase the number of surviving presumed victims 29. The Court emphasizes that, under Article 35(1) of its Rules of Procedure, the report referred to in Article 50 of the Convention must contain “all the facts that allegedly violate the Convention, including the identification of the presumed victims.” Thus, it is the Commission and not the Court that must identify, precisely and at the appropriate procedural moment, the presumed victims in a case before the Court.35 Nevertheless, Article 35(2) of the Rules of Procedure establishes that “[w]hen it has not been possible to identify one or more of the alleged victims who figure in the facts of the case because it concerns massive or collective violations, the Court shall decide whether to consider those individuals as victims.” 30. In this regard, the Court notes that the facts of the case relate to the presumed violations of the human rights of migrants, some of whom lost their life, others were injured and others were supposedly detained and expelled from the country. This allows it to be considered that, on the one hand, the facts of the case relate to presumed collective violations and, on the other hand, that the migratory condition of the presumed victims allegedly expelled and their situation of vulnerability and marginalization may, in this case, make their effective identification and determination more complex. Therefore, the Court observes that, at the Commission’s request, in a communication of September 21, 2010, the representatives sent it a brief indicated that they were attaching a list of victims and their next of kin. In this brief, they stated that, owing to the expulsion, some of the victims were obliged to move frequently and that the earthquake that occurred in Haiti on January 12, 2010, resulted in a series of technical complications to locate and communicate with the victims, so that it was impossible to provide a complete and updated list of the said persons. Consequently, they asked the Commission to take this special situation into account and, based on force majeure, allow them to present an updated list of victims at a future date. 36 31. Accordingly, the Court finds that this case falls within the context of Article 35(2) of the Rules of Procedure. Consequently, the Court will consider as presumed victims those persons included by the Commission in its Merits Report (supra para. 27), derived from the list forwarded by the representatives in the proceedings before the Commission (supra para. 30). 32. Thus, with regard to Noclair Florvilien, Rose Marie Petit-Homme Estilien, Joseph Dol and Silvie Felizor, the Commission noted that it had received the representatives’ list that included their names (supra para. 270). However, without any specific reason, it stated that it had no further information to declare them as victims. In addition, at the request of the representatives, Mr. Florvilien testified in the hearing before the Court without the State or the Commission opposing this. Thus, in addition to the said testimony during the hearing, the Court has sufficient probative evidence to determine that Noclair Florvillien was involved in the facts of this case and, as such, he will be considered a presumed victim.37 35 Cf. Case of the Ituango Massacres v. Colombia. Preliminary objection, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of July 1, 2006. Series C No. 148, para. 98, and Case of Furlan and family members. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of August 31, 2012. Series C No. 246, para. 277. 36 Brief of September 21, 2010 (file of annexes to the merits report, folios 1001 and 1002). 37 Cf. Statement made by Noclair Florvilien during the public hearing of this case held on June 21, 2012. See also: Sworn statement by Noclair Florvilien of July 8, 2011; medical evaluation of Noclair Florvilien of July 9, 2011; psychological evaluation of Noclair Florvilien of July 9, 2011, and sworn statement of Noclair Florvilien of July 9, 2011 (file of annexes to the pleadings and motions brief, folios 2687, 2969, 2986 and 3095, respectively). 12