327. Mr. Ogura reiterated his story before the Peruvian courts, 404 the Inter-American Commission,405 and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.406 328. The file contains no other statements to corroborate Hidetaka Ogura’s story. However, it does contain statements by commandos confirming that they shot the MRTA members during the evacuation of the hostages. Walter Martín Becerra Noblecilla, whose task was to support Major Huarcaya Lovón in taking control of room “I” by entering from the balcony, said that he spotted two MRTA members at the door, and he shot at them to prevent them from entering the room, but he did not see when they were killed. He did confirm, however, that he later saw two dead MRTA members in the room—a man and a woman.407 José Luis Alvarado Díaz also recalled having shot at a man and a woman who were crouched down, entering room “I”.408 Raúl Huarcaya Lovón, head of squad eight, said that as the last hostage was being evacuated, he heard shots from inside the room and was informed that two MRTA members had been taken down, and he reported this to the head of “Delta Strike Force” at the end of the operation.409 329. The Commission emphasized the contradictions among statements by the different commandos who had been assigned to take control of the same area. The Court notes that the same contradictions were discussed in the domestic jurisdiction during the criminal trial. The Court holds, in this regard, that its task is not to replace the domestic courts in weighing evidence and establishing possible individual responsibilities, a decision that pertains to the domestic criminal courts, but instead to analyze the actions or omissions of agents of the State, based on evidence brought by the parties.410 The Court reiterates that it is not a criminal court and that, as a general rule, it is not for the Court to decide on the authenticity of the evidence produced in a domestic investigation when this has been considered valid in the competent Cf. Statement by Hidetaka Ogura before the Third Special Criminal Chamber, proceedings of session 68, April 23, 2012 (evidence file, volume XV, annex 17 to the State’s answering brief, folios 10300 to 10330). The 2012 verdict by the domestic courts said: “[…] there were two different moments; Hidetaka Ogura’s statement about the detention of Cruz Sánchez is found plausible, as there are two other statements on the development of this one point, which makes it likely to have happened; a majority of the panel agrees, by contrast, that his story about the deaths of Peceros and Meléndez is the only such statement, which, if it is weighed together with multiple other items of evidence already described, leads to believe that it did not occur, especially if the outcome is not as to a fact per se, but rather, the possible presence of criminal liability.” Ruling by the Third Special Criminal Chamber of the Superior Court of Lima, October 15, 2012 (evidence file, volume XX, annexed to the representatives’ observations on the State’s preliminary objections, folio 13649). 404 Cf. Testimony rendered by Hidetaka Ogura to the Inter-American Commission in a public hearing on February 28, 2005 (evidence file, volume II, annex 46 to the case submission brief, folio 1326). 405 Cf. Sworn statement by Hidetaka Ogura taken and certified by a public attestor on January 28, 2014 (evidence file, volume XXX, affidavits, folios 20620 to 20624). 406 Cf. Initial statement by Walter Martín Becerra Noblecilla before the Third Special Criminal Chamber, August 1, 2002 (evidence file, volume XXIV, further helpful evidence, folios 16913 to 16927). 407 Cf. Continuation of the initial statement by José Luis Alvarado Díaz before the Third Special Criminal Chamber, August 2, 2002 (evidence file, volume XXIV, further helpful evidence, folios 16930 to 16939). See also: initial statement by Manuel Antonio Paz Ramos before the Third Special Criminal Chamber, August 5, 2002 (evidence file, volume XXIV, further helpful evidence, folios 16941 to 16953). 408 Cf. Expanded the statement by Raúl Huarcaya Lovón before the Specialized Provincial Criminal Prosecutor, November 28, 2001 (evidence file, volume XXVI, CVR evidence, folios 18870 to 18873), and initial statement by Raúl Huarcaya Lovón before the Third Special Criminal Chamber, August 21, 2002 (evidence file, volume XXIV, further helpful evidence, folios 16997 to 17008). 409 Cf. Case of Cantoral Huamaní and García Santa Cruz v. Peru, supra, para. 87, and Case of Gutiérrez and family v. Argentina, supra, para. 78. 410