11 47. According to the consistent practice of the Court, at the beginning of each procedural stage, the parties must indicate the evidence they will offer, on the first occasion they are granted to present a written communication. Moreover, in exercise of its discretionary power under Article 44 of its Rules of Procedure, the Court may request the parties to provide additional elements of evidence it considers helpful, although this does not provide another opportunity for expanding or complementing the allegations or offering new evidence, unless the Court allows it.15 48. Moreover, the Court has indicated previously, in the matter of receiving and weighing evidence, that its proceedings are not subject to the same formalities as domestic proceedings and, when incorporating certain elements into the body of evidence, particular attention must be paid to the circumstances of the specific case and to the limits imposed by respect for legal certainty and the procedural equality of the parties16. Likewise, the Court has taken account of international case law; by considering that international courts have the authority to assess and evaluate the evidence according to the rules of sound criticism, it has always avoided of making a rigid determination as to the quantum of evidence needed to support a judgment.17 This criterion is especially true for international human rights courts, which have greater latitude to evaluate the evidence, although always in accordance with the principles of logic and on the basis of experience.18 49. Based on the foregoing, the Court will now proceed to examine and weigh all the element of the body of evidence in this case, according to the principle of sound criticism within the applicable treaty framework. A) DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE 50. The chapter on the proceeding before the Court contains the documentary evidence contributed by the parties (supra paras. 10, 14, and 24) and the evidence to help the Court reach a decision (supra paras. 26 and 27). B) TESTIMONIAL AND EXPERT EVIDENCE 51. On February 20 and 21, 2003, the Court received the statements of the witnesses and the report of the expert witness offered by the Inter-American Commission and by the representatives of the alleged victim (supra para. 20). The Court summarizes the relevant part of these statements below: 15 Cf. Bulacio case, supra note 14, para. 41; Juan Humberto Sánchez case. supra note 14, para. 29; and Las Palmeras case. Reparations (Art. 63(1) of the American Convention on Human Rights). Judgment of November 26, 2002. Series C No. 96, para. 17. 16 Cf. Bulacio case, supra note 14, para. 42; Juan Humberto Sánchez case, supra note 14, para. 30; and “Five Pensioners” case, supra note 14, para. 65. 17 Cf. Bulacio case, supra note 14, para. 42; Juan Humberto Sánchez case, supra note 14, para. 30; and “Five Pensioners” case, supra note 14, para. 65. 18 Cf. Bulacio case, supra note 14, para. 42; Juan Humberto Sánchez case, supra note 14, para. 30; and “Five Pensioners” case, supra note 14, para. 65.