36 November 24, 2003; Decree No. 2767 issued on August 31, 2004; Decree 250 issued on February 7, 2005; Law 387 of July 18, 1997; Decree 85 of 1989; Law 200 of 1995; Reports by the United Nations High Commissioner on Human Rights regarding the human rights situation in Colombia in 1998, 2000, 2004 and 2005; Economic and Social Council, Report by the Special Rapporteur on adequate housing as a component of the right to adequate living conditions and on the right to nondiscrimination in this regard, E/CN.4/2005/48, March 3, 2005; Report by the InterAmerican Commission on Human Rights on the Process of Demobilization in Colombia issued on December 13, 2004, OAS/Ser.L/V/II.120 Doc. 60; Unified Record of Displaced Population, accrued number of individuals included due to displacement up to August 31, 2005; High Commissioner for Peace in Colombia, Dialogue and Negotiation, Grupos de Autodefensa, Informe Annual Report on Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law 2002 and Avances Periodo Presidencial 2003, issued by the National Defense Ministry of the Republic of Colombia; statistics of the Red de Solidaridad Social on internal displacement; and Programa Nacional de atención integral a la población desplazada por la violencia - CONPES – Consejería Presidencial para los Derechos Humanos, document 2804 of September 13, 1995, National Planning Department of the Ministry of the Interior. 91. With regard to the documents attributed to the State Department of the United States of America, appended to the application by the Commission, the Court finds that they do not fulfill minimum formal requirements for admissibility, as it is not possible to precisely establish their source, as well as the procedure by which they were obtained. These circumstances do not allow the Court to give said documents evidentiary value. 92. With regard to the documents requested and forwarded as evidence to facilitate adjudication (supra paras. 28, 30 and 45), the Court includes them in the body of evidence of the instant case, applying the provisions of paragraph two, Article 45 of the Rules of Procedure. Assessment of the testimony and expert opinions 93. With regard to the statements rendered by the witnesses and the expert witness offered by the Commission, the representatives, and the State, the Court admits them insofar as they are in accordance with the object of the examination set forth by the President in the January 28, 2005 and February 18, 2005 Orders (supra paras. 25 and 30) and gives them evidentiary value. 94. In this regard, this Court deems that the testimony of Nory Giraldo de Jaramillo, Marina Sanmiguel Duarte, Viviana Barrera Cruz, Luz Mery Pinzón López, and Mariela Contreras Cruz (supra paras. 25 and 38) is useful in the instant case.17 However, since they are next of kin of alleged victims and have a direct interest in this case, it will not be assessed in an isolated manner, but rather in the context of the body of evidence of the proceeding. 17 See Case of Yatama, supra note 7, para. 122; Case of Fermín Ramírez. Judgment of June 20, 2005. Series C No. 126, para. 49, and Case of the Indigenous Community Yakye Axa, supra note 12, para. 43.