21 is important that the prohibition against persons arrested being questioned without a lawyer being present be rigourously applied. Medical examinations established by the Colombian laws to be conducted upon entry into and release from arrest centers must be carried out rigourously, avoiding relying on good treatment certificates as a means of vouching that the person has not been subjected to coercion or torture. It is also essential that the decision in judgment C-358 of 1997 issued by the Colombian Constitutional Court be fully enforced. Such judgment establishes that “military or judicial criminal jurisdiction, which pursuant to the Constitution shelters police and military authorities in criminal cases, cannot be extended to cases involving human rights violations.” Even though as a result of said judgment of the Constitutional Court “a considerable number of […] investigations of human rights violations have been removed from the military criminal courts to the ordinary courts,” there are still opinions in favor of these cases being heard by the military courts. The expert witness held that it is necessary to prevent the victims from being disparaged because of any kind of prejudice, including the prejudice that the victim is a criminal, casting doubts on their testimony and giving credit to the authorities eventually being investigated. In this regard, it is necessary to give adequate instruction to the officials responsible for judicial and disciplinary investigations, concerning the fact that, in cases of torture, the victims cannot be treated as if they were criminals, and their testimony must be taken into consideration. C) EVIDENCE ASSESSMENT Documentary Evidence Assessment 43. In the instant case, as in others,6 the Court recognizes the evidentiary value of the documents submitted by the parties at the appropriate procedural moment or as evidence to facilitate the adjudication of the case pursuant to Article 45 of the Rules of Procedure, which have not been disputed nor challenged, and whose authenticity has not been questioned. 44. The Court finds helpful for the adjudication of the instant case the copy of “the entire record of the case instituted in the Military Criminal Courts against Colonel Luis Gonzaga Enciso Baron, charged with criminal assault and battery against Mr. Wilson Gutiérrez-Soler,” which has been forwarded by the State on February 16, 2005 (supra para. 23), as it was not disputed or challenged, nor was its authenticity or truthfulness questioned. The file is thus incorporated to the body of evidence pursuant to Article 45.1 of the Rules of Procedure.7 6 Cf. Case of Acosta Calderón, supra note 3, para. 45; Case of YATAMA, supra note 3, para. 112; and Case of Fermín Ramírez, supra note 3, para. 48. 7 Cf. Case of the Indigenous Community Yakye Axa. Judgment of June 17, 2005. Series C No. 125, para. 44; Case of the Serrano Cruz Sisters. Judgment of March 01, 2005. Series C No. 120, para. 41; and Case of Lori Berenson Mejía. Judgment of November 25, 2004. Series C No. 119, para. 81.