22 Oscar Centurión (supra para. 34 (g)), the Court admits them inasmuch as they are in accordance with the object thereof and assesses them as a whole with the rest of the body of evidence, applying thereto the standards of reasonable credit and weight analysis. Furthermore, the Court shall take into consideration the comments made by the representatives as regards to the statement given by Mr. Oscar Centurión and the expert opinion given by Mr. Augusto Fogel (supra para. 23). 40. As to the expert statement given before a public official whose acts command full faith and credit (affidavit) by Mr. Martín Sanneman (supra para. 34 (f)), the Court has verified that its content is a copy of the report submitted by the InterAmerican Commission as attachment No. 16 to the application, entitled “Report to the President of the Chamber of Deputies of the Congress, to the Commission on Human Rights and to the Ecology Committee regarding the situation of indigenous peoples and forest cutting in the Chaco,” likewise authored by Mr. Martín Sanneman on April 8, 1994, and which the Court assesses as such. The expert report submitted through an affidavit shall be assessed inasmuch as it is in accordance with the object set forth in Order of the President issued on December 21, 2005 (supra para. 18). 41. As to the expert opinion given before a public official whose acts command full faith and credit (affidavit) by expert witness Pablo Balmaceda-Rodríguez (supra para. 34 (f)), the Court has verified that its content is an updated reaffirmation of the report submitted by the Inter-American Commission as attachment No. 8 to the complaint, entitled “Medical and Health Report on the Enxet Sawhoyamaxa Community,” also authored by Mr. Balmaceda-Rodríguez during the first semester of 2003, and which the Court assesses as such. The expert report submitted through an affidavit shall be assessed inasmuch as it is in accordance with the object set forth in Order of the President issued on December 21, 2005 (supra para. 18). 42. Regarding the expert opinion of Mr. Andrew Paul Leake, which was not given before a public official whose acts command full faith and credit, the Court admits it inasmuch as it is in accordance with the object set forth in Order of the President issued on December 21, 2005 and assesses it as a whole with the rest of the body of evidence, applying thereto the standards of reasonable credit and weight analysis. On other occasions the Court has admitted sworn statements which were not given before a public official with authority to confer full faith and credit to the acts passed before him provided that legal certainty and the procedural equality between the parties are not impaired.9 43. At the due procedural stage(supra para. 20) the Inter-American Commission and the representatives submitted their comments to the expert opinions rendered by Mr. Bernardo Jacquet and Mr. César Escobar-Cattebecke in the Case of the Indigenous Community Yakye Axa v. Paraguay, admitted as documentary evidence at the request of the State, to the record of the instant case, by virtue of Order of the President of December 21, 2005 (supra para. 18). In this regard, the representatives stated, inter alia, that “[b]oth the expert opinion given by Bernardo Jacquet and that given by César Escobar-Cattebecke contain general information which makes no reference to the case in point. Though they list the sanitary facilities and medical aid posts which allegedly exist in the area of Chaco, such information is not complete since it does not 9 Cf. Case of Acevedo-Jaramillo et al, supra note 3, para. 191; Case of “Mapiripán Massacre.” Judgment of September 15, 2005. Series C No. 134; para. 82, and Case of Gutiérrez-Soler, supra note 8, para. 45.