that these documents were not requested by the Court, they were not presented at the proper procedural moment for receipt of documentary evidence, and they do not constitute supervening evidence, and therefore they will not be taken into account. 34. Additionally, the Court observes that along with their final written arguments, the representatives presented a series of documents as annexes and supervening evidence, some of which, as they indicated, correspond to “events that occurred subsequent to” the presentation of its brief of requests, arguments, and evidence. 31 In this regard, the Commission observed that Annex 1 had already been provided as Annex C29 to the brief of requests, arguments, and evidence from the representatives. It also indicated that Annex 2 and part of Annex 3 had already been submitted to the Court by the parties, as well as the part of Annexes 3 and 4 “regarding the actions taken in the framework of domestic investigations, subsequent to the presentation of the [pleadings and motions brief], and they therefore must be considered as supervening evidence.” Lastly, it indicated that it had no observations on Annexes 5 to 7 corresponding to receipts of expenses incurred by the representatives of the alleged victims. The State, for its part, observed with respect to Annex 1, that “the State of Colombia was not sent the Seventh Follow-up Report to Order 092 and Second Followup Report to Order 009 of 2015, Reserved Annexes, August 2020 Edition. Therefore, this document is not part of the international case file.” With respect to the remaining annexes, it stated that it had no observations. 35. The Court verifies that, indeed, the aforementioned Annexes 1 and 2 are already part of the file before this Court, since they were forwarded as annexes number C29 to the brief of requests, arguments and evidence of the representatives of the alleged victims and as part of Annex 45 to the State's answering brief, respectively. Regarding Annex 3, the Court confirms that part of it is already part of the file before this Court. Likewise, the remaining part, as well as Annex 4 in its entirety, constitute information related to events subsequent to the representatives’ presentation of their brief of requests, arguments, and evidence. Lastly, the Court observes that there is no dispute with respect to Annexes 5 to 7. 36. Therefore, pursuant to the terms of article 57(2) of the Rules of Procedure, the annexes identified with numbers 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 presented by the representatives along with their final written arguments are admitted. B. Admissibility of the testimonial and expert evidence 37. This Court finds it pertinent to admit the statements provided by affidavit 32 and during the requests, arguments, and evidence: ANNEX N4. CV Ana María Reyes.pdf; 4) Case 12.954 - Jineth Bedoya, Colombia Public Hearing of 157th regular sessions of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) Tuesday, April 5, 2016; 5) Sisma Mujer press release, “Exclusion of JJ and Panadero from the Justice and Peace Law is a triumph for Jineth Bedoya and the women victims of sexual violence,” Linda María Cabrera, Deputy Director Sisma Mujer; 6) Book, La inviolabilidad del cuerpo de las mujeres hace la paz sostenible: 5 claves para un tratamiento diferenciado de la violencia sexual en los acuerdos sobre los derechos de las víctimas en el proceso de paz; 7) IACHR, Note on the granting of precautionary measures in favor of Jineth Bedoya Lima et al., June 2, 2000, and 8) IACHR, Case 12.954 Jineth Bedoya Lima, Note on adding the case file on precautionary measures granted in favor of Jineth Bedoya Lima to the merits process, June 6, 2017. 31 These are the following documents: 1) Follow-up Roundtable on Orders 092 of 2008 and 009 of 2015. Access to Justice for Women who are Victims of Sexual Violence: Seventh follow-up report to Order 092 of 2008 and Second follow-up report to Order 009 of 2015, Reserved Annexes, up to November 2019. Bogota: Ediciones Antropos, August 2020; 2) Office of the Attorney General of the Nation. Unit on Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law. File number 807. Volume 31; 3) Office of the Attorney General of the Nation. Unit on Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law. File number 807. Volume 32; 4) Office of the Attorney General of the Nation. Unit on Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law. File number 807. Volume 33; 5) Receipts for FLIP expenses; 6) receipts for CEJIL expenses, and 7) Electronic signature formalizing Michel Forst affidavit. 32 The statements made before a notary public (affidavit) were received from Luz Nelly Lima, Catalina Botero, Ignacio 13