7 32. Prior to examining the evidence offered, the Court will present, based on that established in Articles 44 and 45 of the Rules of Procedure, some considerations developed in the jurisprudence of the Tribunal and applicable to this case. 33. The principle of the presence of the parties to the dispute applies to evidentiary matters, and it involves respecting the parties’ right to a defense. The principle is enshrined in Article 44 of the Rules of Procedure, in what refers to the time frame in which evidence must be submitted, in order to secure equality among the parties.3 34. According to the Tribunal’s practice, at the beginning of each stage in the first opportunity granted to offer a written statement, the parties must mention what evidence they will offer. Also, in the exercise of the discretionary authorities contemplated in Article 45 of the Rules of Procedure, the Court or its President may request additional evidentiary elements from the parties as evidence to facilitate adjudication of the case, without this turning into a new opportunity to expand or supplement the arguments, unless expressly permitted by the Tribunal.4 35. The Court has stated, with regard to the receipt and assessment of the evidence, that the proceeding followed before them is not subject to the same formalities as domestic judicial actions, and that the incorporation of certain elements into the body of evidence must be done paying special attention to the circumstances of the specific case and taking into account the limits imposed by the respect to legal security and the procedural balance of the parties. The Court has also taken into account that international jurisprudence, when it considers that international courts have the power to appraise and assess the evidence according to the rules of competent analysis, has not established a rigid determination of the quantum of the evidence necessary to substantiate a ruling. This criterion is especially valid for international human rights tribunals that have ample powers in the assessment of evidence presented before them regarding the relevant facts, pursuant to the rules of logic and on the basis of experience.5 36. Based on the aforementioned, the Court will proceed to examine and assess the documentary evidentiary elements forwarded by the Commission, the representatives, and the State in the different procedural opportunities or as evidence to facilitate adjudication of the case requested by the Tribunal or its President, all of which makes up the body of evidence of the present case. For this, the Tribunal will comply with the principles of competent analysis, within the corresponding legal framework. A) DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE 3 Cfr. Case of Ximenes Lopes. Judgment of July 4, 2006. Series C No. 149, para. 42; Case of Ituango Massacres. Judgment of July 1, 2006. Series C No. 148, para. 106; and Case of Baldeón García. Judgment of April 6, 2005. Series C No. 147, para. 60. 4 Cfr. Case of Ximenes Lopes, supra note 3, para. 43; Case of the Ituango Massacres, supra note 3, para. 107; and Case of Baldeón García, supra note 3, para. 61. 5 Cfr. Case of Ximenes Lopes, supra note 3, para. 44; Case of the Ituango Massacres, supra note 3, para. 108; and Case of Baldeón García, supra note 3, para. 62.