18 notwithstanding, it is through such events that the witness can discuss, in his testimony, the activities of Mr. Chitay Nech, and which is adjusted to the objective defined by the Presidency, in relation to the violence carried out against political leaders and the nexus between Florencio Chitay and the DC party (supra para. 48(c)). Therefore, the Court admits the testimony and evaluates it with the body of evidence and in accordance to the rules of competent analysis. 60. Regarding the testimony of Claudia Elisa Sesam, the State expressed that “a witness is ‘the person that presents or acquires direct and true knowledge of something’[ and that] the witness manifest[ed] in her testimony that she did not had the opportunity to personally know Mr. Florencio Chitay Nech[,] for which […] said testimony lacks evidentiary value.” The Court observes that the State’s observations refer to the evidentiary value of said testimony, that which will be taken into consideration at the corresponding procedural opportunity, in light of the body of evidence and the rules of competent analysis. 61. In regards to the expert witness of Cesar Augusto Davila Gomez offered by the State, the representatives in their final written arguments requested that this testimony be considered as ordinary testimony evidence and not as that rendered by an expert witness, because “the conditions for it to be considered an expert opinion, for its academic and experimental qualification, and for the characteristics of its presentation, were not fulfilled.” In this regard, the Tribunal dismisses the observations of the representatives and admits said declaration as expert testimony, in accordance with the Order of the Presidency (supra para. 7), which assesses it in accordance with the body of evidence in the present case and the rules of competent analysis. 62. Having carried out an examination of the evidentiary elements that make up the case file, the Court goes on to analyze the alleged violations. VIII FORCED DISAPPEARANCE OF FLORENCIO CHITAY NECH (ARTICLES 7, 5, 4, 3, AND 23 OF THE AMERICAN CONVENTION, IN ACCORDANCE WITH ARTICLE 1(1) OF THE CONVENTION, AND ARTICLES I, II, AND III OF THE INTER-AMERICAN CONVENTION ON THE FORCED DISAPPEARANCE OF PERSONS) 63. In the present chapter, the Court will analyze in the light of the partial recognition of international liability, the facts and violations of human rights enshrined in the American Convention, as well as the lack of fulfillment of the ICFDP, argued in the present case. 1. Context of the case and facts regarding the forced disappearance of Florencio Chitay Nech. A) Context of the case 64. In Guatemala, between the years of 1962 and 1996, an internal armed conflict took place that brought great human, material, institutional, and moral costs.40 During such conflict, the State applied the denominated “National Security Doctrine”.41 It has been 40 Cf. CEH, Guatemala: Memory of Silence, supra note 35, Tome V, Chapter IV, page 21, para. 2; Case Tiu Tojín V. Guatemala. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of 26 of November of 2008. Series C No. 190, para. 48, and Case of the Dos Erres Massacre v. Guatemala, supra note 12, para. 70. 41 Cf. CEH, Guatemala: Memory of Silence, supra note 35, Tome I, Chapter II, page 83, para. 23.