- 21 - (6) Roberto Garretón, expert witness proposed by the representatives, who provided information on the determination, scope and characteristics of the systematic and generalized patterns of human rights violations and of crimes against humanity; (7) Fernando Quinché Ramírez, expert witness proposed by the representatives, who provided information on the alleged violation of political rights, the right to associate for political reasons, and the right of the electorate to elect a candidate of their choice in this case from a legal and constitutional perspective, and on possible reparations to redress the harm to these rights, and (8) Francisco Javier Dondé Matute, expert witness proposed by the State, who provided information on the concept of crimes against humanity, their nature, and the possibility of attributing this type of crime to a State. 55. In addition, at a public hearing, the Court heard the statements of the following presumed victims, witnesses58 and expert witnesses:59 (1) Hernan Motta Motta, witness proposed by the Commission and the representatives, who testified on the context in which the facts of this case occurred; the supposed “coup de grâce plan”; the complaints that Senator Cepeda Vargas had filed before the authorities owing to the presumed danger he faced, and the attention that the said authorities paid to these complaints; (2) Jaime Caicedo, witness proposed by the Commission and the representatives, who testified on the activities, political life, and work as a journalist of Senator Cepeda Vargas; his role as leader of the UP, and the threats, harassment and pressure that he faced throughout his public life, as well as on the alleged situation faced by members of the UP and, particularly its leaders, at the time of the facts; (3) María Estella Cepeda Vargas, presumed victim, who testified on the work of here brother, Senator Manuel Cepeda Vargas, as a politician and as a journalist, including his work at the weekly publication Voz, and in the PCC and UP parties; her relationship with him, and the impact of his death for her and the other members of the family; (4) Iván Cepeda Castro, presumed victim, who testified on the work in politics and journalism of his father, Senator Cepeda Vargas; the Senator’s family life and the impact of the supposed threats on his family; Senator Cepeda’s death and its impact on himself and his family; the steps he took to obtain justice in this case, and the impact on his life project of Manuel Cepeda’s death and the alleged threats and harassment that he received subsequently; 5) Michael Reed Hurtado, expert witness proposed by the representatives, who provided information on the process for the demobilization of the paramilitary groups in Colombia, from a legal and practical perspective, and on the effect of 58 As required in the said order of the President, Fernando Brito was admitted as a witness offered by the State but, on January 18, 2010, the State advised that “owing to circumstances beyond his control, he was unable to appear at the hearing.” 59 Cf. Order issued by the President of the Court on December 22, 2009, first, second, third, fourth and fifth operative paragraphs.