consular assistance. g) The Haitian authorities shall proceed to establish immigration control posts along the Dominico-Haitian border to avoid the illegal flow of its citizens towards the Dominican Republic. h) The Haitian Government undertakes to increase its efforts to furnish its nationals with Haitian identity documents in the context of the potential migratory flow towards the Dominican Republic. 191. Lastly, the respective part of Law No. 1494 of August 9, 1947, which institutes the contentious-administrative jurisdiction 176 in force at the time of the facts, established: Art. 1. Anyone, whether natural or juridical, with a legitimate interest, may file the contentiousadministrative remedy established below in the cases, manner and within the time frames established in this law: (1) against the judgments of any contentious-administrative court of first instance or a court that is essentially of this nature, and (2) against illegal administrative acts, regulations and decrees, that meet the following requirements: a) That they are acts against which all hierarchical claims within the administration or the autonomous administrative bodies have been exhausted; b) That they emanate from the administration or from the autonomous administrative bodies in the exercise of their authority regulated by laws, regulations or decrees; c) That they violate a right, of an administrative nature, established previously in favor of the appellant by law, regulation or decree, or an administrative contract; d) That they constitute an excessive or distorted exercise of their own legitimate purpose, or of discretional authority conferred by laws, regulations or decrees. [...] Art. 9. The time limit for filing an appeal before the Secretaries of State or before the autonomous administrative bodies against the decision of a contentious-administrative nature issued by the directors, administrators or heads of the offices that are subordinate to them, is 10 days from the date of the receipt by the party concerned of the communication that must be transmitted by the said directors, administrators or heads by special delivery registered mail. Paragraph I. The time limit to appeal before the Superior Administrative Court is 15 days as of the day on which the appellant has received the judgment of the contentious-administrative court of first instance, in the case of an appeal, or of the day on which he has received notification of the act appealed, or the day of the official publication of the act appealed by the authority that issued it, or the day the time limit set in article 2 of this law expires, in the case of an appeal due to delay. B) Facts of the case B.1. Introduction 192. The Court will now refer to the facts relating to the presumed victims in this case who were determined in paragraph 78 of this Judgment. In view of the fact that, in this case, the dispute focuses mainly on the alleged situation concerning the identity of some presumed victims, their nationality, and whether or not they have been expelled, in the following section, the Court will describe the identity and what happened to the members of each family, taking into consideration, on the one hand, the official documents forwarded or other sources such as the statements of the presumed victims themselves, as well as the arguments of the parties and of the Commission, and on the other hand, the findings in the chapter on evidence, and in the chapter on the preliminary issues in relation to the determination of the presumed victims. 193. In this regard, the Court considers it relevant to recall its case law regarding the criteria applicable to the assessment of the evidence. Since its first contentious case, the Court has indicated that, for an international court, the criteria used to assess the evidence are different from those used by domestic legal systems, and has asserted that it 176 Law No. 1494 of August 9, 1947, published in Official Gazette No. 6673 (file of annexes to the answering brief, fs. 5751 to 5765). 63