- 20 - Court. To this end, the Court will abide by the principles of sound judicial discretion, within the corresponding normative framework.57 A) Documentary, testimonial and expert evidence 54. The Order of the President of December 22, 2009, (supra para. 8) required that statements made before notary public (affidavits) be received from the following presumed victims and expert witnesses: (1) Claudia Girón Ortíz, presumed victim, who testified on alleged acts of harassment, threats and attacks against her father-in-law; the facts that occurred on August 9, 1994; the different measures taken by the next of kin immediately after his death; the attitude and response of the authorities to these measures; the conduct of the investigations in the domestic sphere and the obstacles faced by the family of Mr. Cepeda Vargas in their search for justice; the exile that she underwent, together with her direct family, and the consequences that these facts have had on her personal life and on that of her family; (2) María Cepeda Castro, presumed victim, who testified on alleged acts of harassment, threats and attacks against her father; the facts that occurred on August 9, 1994; the different measures taken by the family immediately after his death; the attitude and response of the authorities to these measures; the conduct of the investigations in the domestic sphere and the obstacles faced by the family of Mr. Cepeda Vargas in their search for justice; the exile that she is still undergoing together with her direct family, and the consequences that these facts have had on her personal life and on that of her family; (3) Eduardo Cifuentes Muñoz, expert witness proposed by the Commission and the representatives who provided information on the context, and on the death of Manuel Cepeda Vargas and the alleged relationship of this with his role of leader of the UP political party, member of the PCC Central Committee, and Senator of the Republic, within the framework of an alleged pattern of violence and stigmatization against members of the Patriotic Union and the PCC; (4) Anders Johnson, expert witness proposed by the representatives, who provided information on the alleged significance and relationship of the death of Manuel Cepeda Vargas with his role of UP member of Parliament, within the framework of an alleged pattern of violence against members of that party and of the PCC, as well as on possible measures of restitution and reparation of a political nature in this case; (5) Carlos Beristain, expert witness proposed by the representatives, who provided information on the psycho-social problems of the alleged victims as a result of the facts of the instant case, and on possible reparations with regard to this harm; 57 Cf. The “White Van” (Paniagua Morales et al.) v. Guatemala. Merits. Judgment of March 8, 1998. Series C No. 37, para. 76; the Dos Erres Massacre v. Guatemala. Preliminary objection, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 24, 2009. Series C No. 211, para. 55, and Case of Radilla Pacheco v. Mexico, supra note 24, para. 67.