6 Inge Genefke; and Hans Petter Houguen. Even though he was summoned by the President, one witness did not appear before the Court to render his testimony.4 29. During the public hearing both the State and the representative of the alleged victims filed various documents (infra para. 46). 30. On June 7, 2004 the Commission and the State submitted their final written pleadings. The representative did so on June 11, 2004. 31. On June 14, 2004 the Secretariat, under instructions by the President, asked the State and the representative of the alleged victims and their next of kin to submit, no later than June 21, 2004, certain documents as evidence to facilitate adjudication of the case regarding the merits and reparations and costs. 32. On June 21, 2004 the representative of the alleged victims and their next of kin submitted the documentary evidence that had been requested as evidence to facilitate adjudication of the case, under instructions by the President. 33. At the time the instant judgment was rendered, the State had not submitted the evidence requested (supra para. 31). V PROVISIONAL MEASURES 34. During the public hearing (supra para. 28), witness Ángel del Rosario Vásquez Chumo stated that: [I] was intimidated, subjected to pressure, [...] I was threatened so that I would not tell the truth about the facts, but [...] I wanted the hearing of the oral trial to begin once and for all to say how the events happened. When the oral trial took place after two years, I said everything about how the events happened, when I left the penitentiary to reenter society, the doors were closed, as they simply identified me as “vaca’e chumbo” and closed the doors on me […]. [I] ask you [to] help [me] to avoid reprisals against my family and against myself, because there was intimidation long before and now, well to hide the things that have happened, afterwards they may take reprisals against me and my family. 35. During the public hearing (supra para. 28), witnesses Lucy Rosa Gómez Paquiyauri, Marcelina Paquiyauri Illanes de Gómez, Ricardo Samuel Gómez Quispe, Miguel Ángel Gómez Paquiyauri, and Jacinta Peralta Allccarima, all next of kin of the alleged victims in the instant case, also stated that they have suffered persecution and harassment after the facts of the case. 36. On May 7, 2004, the representative of the alleged victims and their next of kin asked the Court to “take whatever measures it deem[ed] appropriate for [...] the members of the Gómez Paquiyauri family […] not to suffer reprisal due to their position as [alleged] victims in this case, or harassment with pressures and threats at their domicile” to urge them to “accept” friendly settlements, by the Agent of the Peruvian State or other agents of the State in this proceeding. 4 Juan Valdelomar Quiroz Chávez.