10 as evidence to facilitate the adjudication of the case requested by the President, as well as the testimonial evidence, written expert opinions and the testimony rendered at the public hearing, on the basis of sound judgment, within the applicable legal framework.15 A) Documentary and Testimonial Evidence 32. The Court, following the decision of the President, received the written statements of the following persons: a) Honoria Estrada de Ticona, alleged victim and witness proposed by the Commission and the representative; mother of Renato Ticona. He rendered a statement regarding the forced disappearance of his son, the steps taken to locate him and the situation of the family after the disappearance. b) Cesar Ticona Olivares, alleged victim and witness proposed by the Commission and the representative; father of Renato Ticona. He rendered a statement regarding the forced disappearance of his son, the steps taken to locate him and the situation of the family after the disappearance. c) Rodo Ticona Estrada, alleged victim and witness proposed by the Commission and the representative; brother of Renato Ticona. He rendered a statement regarding the forced disappearance of his brother; the steps taken to locate him and the situation of the family after he disappeared. d) Betzy Ticona Estrada, alleged victim and witness proposed by the Commission and the representative; sister of Renato Ticona. She rendered a statement regarding the forced disappearance of her brother; the steps taken to locate him and the situation of the family after he disappeared. e) Andrés Guatire Hirsch and Zulema Callejas Guzmán, expert witnesses proposed by the Commission and the representative. They rendered an opinion regarding the damage caused to the next-of-kin of Renato Ticona Estrada, as a consequence of his forced disappearance, the steps taken to locate him and the situation of the family after his disappearance. f) Ana María Romero del Campero, expert witness proposed by the Commission and the representative. She rendered an opinion regarding the context of human rights violations during the period that Renato Ticona Estrada disappeared and the lack of judicial investigation in cases similar to the instant case. g) Rosario Baptista Canedo, expert witness proposed by the representative. She rendered an opinion regarding the development of the judicial proceeding initiated by the National Commission on Forced Disappeared; the analysis is based on two periods between 1983 and 1986 and 2005 until March, 2007. 33. Furthermore, at the public hearing, the Court heard the statement made by Hugo Ticona Estrada, alleged victim and brother of Renato Ticona. He rendered a statement regarding the forced disappearance of his brother, the steps taken to 15 Cf. Case of the “White Van” (Paniagua Morales et al.) v. Guatemala. Reparations and Costs. Judgment of May 25, 2001. Series C Nº 76 para. 76; Case of Yvon Neptune v. Haití, supra note 14, para 22; and Case of Heliodoro Portugal v. Panamá, supra note 13, para. 64.