Messrs. Montiel Flores and Cabrera García, in order to demonstrate the impacts caused by the alleged human rights violations suffered by the presumed victims; 11) José Quiroga, co-founder and medical director of the Rehabilitation Program for Victims of Torture in Los Angeles, California, and Vice President of the International Council for the Rehabilitation of Victims of Torture, an expert witness proposed by the representatives, who testified on the following aspects: i) “an evaluation of the physical health of [Messrs. Cabrera and Montiel], describing the [alleged] continued effects of torture and other human rights violations [allegedly] suffered”, and 12) Carlos Castresana Fernández, former Commissioner of the International Commission against Impunity in Guatemala (ICAIG) and former Attorney of the High Court of Spain, expert witness proposed by the Inter-American Commission, who testified on the following aspects: i) “[the] principle of immediacy in criminal procedural matters;” ii) “how to obtain confessions by cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or torture,” and iii) “the validity of such confessions as evidence in legal proceedings.” 26. As to the evidence produced at the public hearing, the Court heard the testimonies rendered by the following persons: 1) Rodolfo Montiel Flores, alleged victim, a witness proposed by the representatives, who testified on the following aspects: i) “his work as a forest advocate, describing the organizational process of [OCESP] to stop the [alleged] excessive logging in the region by transnational and local companies;” ii) “the context of the attacks against members of OCESP in the 1990s;” iii) the alleged “specific violations [allegedly] suffered by him and by Mr. Teodoro Cabrera[,] as from May 1999” and “the effect of those [alleged] violations on his physical and psychological health;” iv) “the [alleged] impact on his family members as a result of those events,” and v) “the measures that the State should adopt to repair this damage;” 2) Fernando Coronado Franco, a specialist in Mexican criminal law and general consultant of the Human Rights Commission of the Federal District, an expert witness presented by the representatives, who testified on the following aspects: i) “how the Mexican legal framework [allegedly] allowed and allows the granting of evidentiary value to statements and confessions rendered without legal oversight;” ii) “the practical effects of the legal framework on the actions of the prosecution and judicial authorities,” referring to the most important domestic case law on this matter; iii) “the [alleged] practice of […] arbitrary and unlawful arrests and the [alleged] lack of adequate controls in the chain of custody and bringing detainees [before the judges]; iv) “the [alleged] practice of omission or forgery of data on official medical certificates issued in relation to detainees;” v) the alleged disparity between the regulatory design of Mexico’s criminal proceedings and recurrent practices; vi) “how the written nature of Mexican criminal procedure, its investigative aspects and the broad powers of the [P]ublic [P]rosecutor’s Office, [apparently] enable and encourage irregular proceedings and the granting evidentiary of value to evidence or information obtained without adequate control[, and] without investigating any complaint of torture reported by individuals accused in criminal proceedings,” vii) “the implications of the Constitutional reform regarding criminal justice approved in June 2008 for the [alleged] practice of violations mentioned,” and viii) “the reforms currently needed to stop the admission of statements obtained without legal oversight in criminal proceedings;”, 14