106. Furthermore, the representatives alleged that the statement made by Maria do Socorro Canuto before the Federal Police was false because, in their opinion, it contained contradictions and inconsistencies; they therefore asked the Court to reject it. The Court considers that these observations refer to the content and evidentiary value of the testimony rather than an objection to the admission of this evidence. 59 Additionally, the representatives’ objection concerning the falsity of the statement is a matter for the domestic jurisdiction. Moreover, it is not admissible to exclude evidence based on its inconsistency with the version of the facts asserted by one of the parties, because this would imply assuming that the latter was true before the corresponding assessment had been made.60 Consequently, the Court finds it pertinent to admit Maria do Socorro Canuto’s statement and to consider it in the context of the whole body of evidence. C. Assessment of the evidence 107. Based on the provisions of Articles 46, 47, 48, 50, 51, 57 and 58 of the Rules of Procedure, as well as on its consistent case law regarding evidence and its evaluation, the Court will examine and assess the documentary probative elements forwarded by the parties and the Commission, together with the statements, testimony and expert opinions, when establishing the facts of the case and ruling on the merits. To this end, it will abide by the principles of sound judgment, within the corresponding legal framework, taking into account the entire body of evidence and the arguments made during the proceedings.61 Also, pursuant to the Court’s case law, the statements made by the presumed victims cannot be assessed on their own, but rather together with all the evidence in the proceedings, insofar as they may provide further information on the presumed violations and the consequences. 62 VI FACTS 108. In this chapter the Court will describe the context of the case and the specific facts that fall within its temporal jurisdiction. 109. The facts prior to the date of ratification of the Court’s contentious jurisdiction by Brazil (December 10, 1998) will only be mentioned as part of the context and background to the case. A. Context A.1. History of slave labor in Brazil 110. Historically, in Brazil, the slave trade has been linked to forced labor and the Portuguese colonization. By the mid-eighteenth century, around 40% of the slave population in Brazil was involved in sugar cane farming. In 1850, the transnational slave trade was abolished and this gave strength to the movement that sought to abolish slavery. Subsequently, in 1888, slavery was legally abolished in Brazil. 59 Cf. Case of Maldonado Ordoñez, para. 29. 60 Cf. Case of Quispialaya Vilcapoma, para. 40. Cf. Case of the “White Van” (Paniagua Morales et al.) v. Guatemala. Merits. Judgment of March 8, 1998. Series C No. 37, para. 76, and Case of Tenorio Roca, para. 45. 61 Cf. Case of Loayza Tamayo v. Peru. Merits. Judgment of September 17, 1997. Series C No. 33, para. 43, and Case of Tenorio Roca, para. 46. 62 26