14 than under domestic legal systems, as inter-American case law had established. Arguments of the representatives of the victims 36. With regard to the request for interpretation presented by the State concerning the assessment of the evidence and the proven facts, the representatives of the victims indicated that: a) b) Article 67 of the American Convention establishes that the judgment of the Court shall be final and not subject to appeal and in case of disagreement as to the meaning or scope of the judgment, the Court shall interpret it at the request of any of the parties. Likewise, Article 29 of the Rules of Procedure establishes that the judgments and orders of the Court may not be contested in any way; In this respect, they did not refer to the arguments on the merits of the case, given that “such arguments are not among the premises established for the only recourse stipulated in the Convention[,] relating to interpretation of judgment”; c) Concerning the interpretation of its decisions, as of its first judgments, the Court has indicated that “the interpretation of a judgment implies clarifying not only the text of the operative paragraphs of the judgment, but also the determination of the scope, meaning and purpose of the decision, in accordance with the considerations set forth in the judgment” and, d) In the request for interpretation filed in this case, “there is no mention of aspects of the judgment whose meaning or scope are in doubt or controversial”; to the contrary, “a review of the judgment is requested by examining the arguments on merits and the way in which the evidence was assessed, facts that were duly considered and justified by [the Inter-American Court]” in the judgment. Considerations of the Court 37. Article 43 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court stipulates: 1. Items of evidence tendered by the parties shall be admissible only if previous notification thereof is contained in the application and in the reply thereto and, when appropriate, in the document setting out the preliminary objections and in the answer thereto. 2. Evidence tendered to the Commission shall form part of the file, provided that it has been received in a procedure with the presence of both parties, unless the Court considers it essential that such evidence should be repeated. 3. Should any of the parties allege force majeure, serious impediment or the emergence of supervening events as grounds for producing an item of evidence, the Court may, in that particular instance, admit such evidence at a time other than those indicated above, provided that the opposing parties are guaranteed the right of defense. 4. In the case of the alleged victim, his next of kin or his duly accredited representatives, the admission of evidence shall also be governed by the provisions of Articles 23, 35(4) and 36(5) of the Rules of Procedure.