18 The 1989 constitutional reform chose not to submit modifications to all the articles of the 1980 Constitution to expand the human rights embodied in it; what was done was to establish a binding norm for all the organs of the State (article 5(2)) requiring them to guarantee and protect all the human rights guaranteed in the Constitution and in the human rights treaties ratified and in force in Chile. With the exception of the modification concerning artistic entertainment that goes beyond the American Convention, the position was adopted that the human rights embodied in the international treaties ratified by Chile and in force should be incorporated into the Constitution. Cinematographic censorship was left in force and the possibility of establishing norms on the public expression of other artistic activities was eliminated. It was argued that, should there be a contradiction between a right established in the Constitution and a right established in an international treaty, the courts would resolve it. At that time, it was thought that the courts would apply the generally admitted principles of international law. He did not agree with the interpretation of the Supreme Court, but it had the legal right to make that interpretation. The amendment of the Constitution with regard to the fundamental rights included in article 19(12) would occur automatically by virtue of article 5(2), unless there was a law or constitutional amendment that was indispensable in order to comply with the treaty. This position is not uniformly accepted. The administrative channel is exhausted after all the organs of the State have intervened and not with the judgment of the Supreme Court alone. Domestic remedies were not exhausted inasmuch as the President of the Republic submitted a draft constitutional reform to ensure that the interpretation of the Legislature and the Executive on the issue is complied with and, even though the draft reform is not a judicial remedy, it is a remedy within the State. The foregoing is based on the principle of subsidiarity, in application of which, if the President of the Republic has used the remedy of constitutional reform, international justice is not yet in order. The State must comply with the judgment of the Inter-American Court, in accordance with the Constitution and the law. If the President of the Republic should order that the film “The Last Temptation of Christ”, which was prohibited, should be exhibited without a constitutional reform, he would be violating article 73 of the Constitution, which prohibits the President of the Republic and the National Congress from taking over pending cases, reviving closed cases and giving an opinion on the merits of judgments. In other words, he could be accused of violating the Constitution of Chile. VI EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT 46. In order to proceed to evaluate the evidence provided in this case, it is first necessary to confirm that it was submitted at the appropriate procedural opportunity. In this respect, Article 43 of the Rules of Procedure indicates: Items of evidence tendered by the parties shall be admissible only if previous notification thereof is contained in the application and in the reply thereto [.] Should any of the parties allege force majeure, serious impediment or the emergence of supervening events as grounds for producing an item of evidence, the Court may, in that particular instance, admit such evidence at a time other than those indicated above, provided that the opposing party is guaranteed the right of defense.