10 28. One of the functions of this Court is to protect the victims, determine which of their rights have been violated, and order reparation of the damages caused by the States responsible for those violations.8 To that end: [t]he sole requirement is to demonstrate that the State authorities supported or tolerated infringement of the rights recognized in the Convention. Moreover, the State's international responsibility is also at issue when it does not take the necessary steps under its domestic law to identify and, where appropriate, punish the authors of such violations.9 * * * A) DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE 29. Attached to the Commission’s application brief (supra 1) was a copy of 95 documents, contained in 77 appendices.10 30. When the State submitted its answer to the application (supra 13), it attached a copy of four court records of cases prosecuted in the domestic courts.11 31. With its reply (supra 14), the Commission sent a copy of 242 documents, contained in 53 appendices.12 32. In its filing of November 29, 2001, the Commission sent a press clipping.13 33. In their brief on reparations, the alleged victim’s representatives tendered a copy of a document, which appeared as an appendix.14 8 Cf. Hilaire, Constantine, and Benjamin et al. Case, supra note 5, par. 66; Constitutional Court Case, Judgment of January 31, 2001. Series C No. 71, par. 47; and Bámaca Velásquez Case. Judgment of November 25, 2000. Series C No. 70, par. 98. 9 Cf. Hilaire, Constantine, and Benjamin et al. Case, supra note 5, par. 66; Constitutional Court Case,. supra, note 8, par. 47; and Bámaca Velásquez Case., supra, note 8, par. 98. 10 File in the Secretariat of the Court. 11 Case files titled “Cantos, José María c/Santiago del Estero, Provincia de y Estado Nacional s/Cobro de pesos” [“Cantos, José María v/ Santiago del Estero, Province of, and National State for payment of amounts owed”], Supreme Court case file C-1099; copy of case file No. 440/72 heard by the Second Bench of the Criminal and Correctional Examining Court of the Provincial Capital of Santiago del Estero; a copy of case file No. 565/72, titled “Complaint brought by Dr. Carim Nassif Neme, as counsel for Miguel Angel Cantos S.A.C.I.F. v/ Luis María Juan José Peña, Director General of Revenue of the Province on abuse of authority and violation of the duties of public office”; copy of motions numbers 8 and 9, filed by Mr. Cantos’ former attorneys, Walter Omar Peralta Rondano and Francisco Alberto Cavalotti. On file with the Secretariat of the Court. 12 On file with the Secretariat of the Court. 13 Case file on the merits, which is on file with the Secretariat of the Court, at 226. 14 Document titled “Algunas consideraciones sobre el procedimiento de solución amistosa en el ámbito internacional de los derechos humanos” [Some thoughts on the friendly settlement procedure in international human rights cases], at 24-31 of the Reparations Case on record with the Secretariat of the Court.