PART 2: How to Bring a Case to the Court evidence. Furthermore, for an international court which in most cases is located far from the location where the incident has occurred, there will be inevitable difficulties in accessing first-hand evidence, and therefore decisions will have to be made largely on the basis of the evidence submitted by the parties. Before the Court can reach a decision under Article 3 of the Convention on an allegation of ill-treatment, it must first establish the facts of the case, i.e. the accuracy of the applicant’s allegations and the circumstances surrounding those allegations. The Court will expect the applicant to adduce evidence in support of his or her allegations, in circumstances where the applicant is unable to do so, the Court may obtain such evidence of its own motion, either by asking the respondent Government to provide it or by taking evidence in situ. The types of evidence which may be adduced in order to substantiate allegations of ill-treatment include – but are not limited to – medical and forensic reports, x-rays and other similar medical records, witness statements, photographs, custody records, reports compiled by inter-governmental and non- governmental organisations, and documents showing that the applicant’s allegations of ill-treatment have been brought to the attention of the domestic authorities. These types of evidence will be discussed below. i) Medical Evidence Where allegations of ill-treatment are contested, medical findings constitute the most objective and convincing type of evidence.149 In this regard, the applicant should note that the most probative kind of medical evidence is evidence that is obtained immediately upon, or very shortly after, the applicant’s ill-treatment and which is consistent with the applicant’s allegations. In practical terms, this usually means that medical evidence should be obtained upon the applicant’s release from State custody, since ill-treatment most often occurs in the custodial setting. This is in line with the fact that the applicant must establish a direct causal link between his or her injuries and the fact of having been in the control of the State. Therefore, the longer the applicant waits before seeking medical assistance, the more difficult it is going to be for him or her to prove that the injuries were sustained during, or were connected with, his or her custody. If the applicant succeeds in establishing that his or her injuries occurred while in State custody, then the burden of proof shifts to the respondent State to disprove the allegations, or to prove that the use of force which caused the injuries was warranted and proportionate under the circumstances. Moreover, for purposes of showing exhaustion of domestic remedies, 149 See David Rhys Jones and Sally Verity Smith, “Medical Evidence in Asylum and Human Rights Appeals”, in International Journal of Refugee Law, vol. 16, 2004. pp. 381–410. 67