10 granted for the representatives of the alleged victims and their next of kin, the Commission, and the State to present their final written arguments. 56. On October 3, 2002, Juan Álvarez Vita, proposed by the Commission to provide an expert witness report at the public hearing on merits and possible reparations1, transmitted an electronic communication presenting his expert report on this case. The following day, the Commission forwarded a communication to which it attached a copy of Mr. Álvarez Vita’s expert report. On October 25, 2002, Mr. Álvarez Vita transmitted the original of this written expert report. 57. On October 25, 2002, the Commission presented its final written arguments. 58. On October 29, 2002, Peru transmitted its final written arguments, together with the appendices. The same day, the State also presented a document entitled “Explicación de los regímenes laborales y pensionarios que se aplican en la República of Peru y análisis específico de la situación de cada uno de los pensionistas” [Explanation of labor and pension regimes applied in the Republic of Peru and specific analysis of the situation of each of the pensioners], to which it added an attachment. 59. On October 30, 2002, the representatives of the alleged victims and their next of kin forwarded their final written arguments. On November 6, 2002, they presented the appendices to this brief. 60. On November 7, 2002, the State forwarded a communication in which it referred to the expert report presented by Máximo Jesús Atauje Montes in this case. 61. On November 18, 2002, Víctor Abramovich, Julieta Rossi, Andrea Pochak and Jimena Garrote, from the Center for Legal and Social Studies (CELS), and Christian Courtis, professor of the Law Faculty of the Universidad de Buenos Aires, presented a brief as amici curiae. 62. On February 24, 2003, the State presented a time-barred communication. V THE EVIDENCE 63. Before examining the evidence received, the Court will outline some considerations that, in light of the provisions of Articles 43 and 44 of the Rules of Procedure, are applicable to this specific case, most of which have been developed in its own case law. 64. First, it is important to point out that the principle of the adversary proceeding, which respects the right of defense of the parties, applies in matters pertaining to evidence. This principle is one of the foundations of Article 43 of the 1 Juan Álvarez Vita did not provide his expert report at the public hearing held on September 3 and 4, 2002, because the Inter-American Commission desisted from presenting this witness’s expert report orally. The Court accepted that, instead, the report of this expert witness could be submitted in writing.