petroleum; in 2004 he was the general coordinator of a multidisciplinary team of university professors investigating irregularities in the recall referendum conducted that year; and on May 24, 2004 he filed an appeal for annulment on Constitutional grounds of the Organic Law of the Supreme Court, as well as an amparo complaint challenging the appointment of justices. According to the petitioner, such activities led to his persecution and harassment by government officials, including the deliberate delay of cases in which he was a litigant, which led him to cease practicing law. 25. In the communication of February q9, 2008 received on the 22 of the same month and year, the petitioner presented information with regard to the presumed violations of due process in the execution of this judgment. Particularly, he mentioned the lack of notification of the decisions related to his rights and the lack of compliance of the authorities with respect to the lifting of the effects of the sentence. 26. Finally, he reported that since he had lost his civil rights, he was prevented from voting in the presidential elections of December 3, 2006 or from participating in the elections for the Board of Directors, Disciplinary Tribunal, or Section Councils of the Professors Association of the Central University of Venezuela held on June 27, 2007. B. The State 27. On August 2, 2007 the State informed that the respective authorities were collecting information in order to respond the petition. 28. On February 8, 2008 the State presented information related to the facts of the penal process interposed by ex-deputy William Lara against the presumed victim on counts of criminal defamation. The State indicated that Criminal Defamation is established in the article 444 of the Venezuelan Penal Code and that the right to the honor and reputation is guaranteed in article 60 of the Constitution of the Republic. The State pointed out that right to honor and reputation, in accordance with the Venezuelan legislation, is an absolute right, which does not have limits and priority on any right that is not considered of equal status. 29. The State alleges that Mr. Álvarez denounced that he had been imputed on specific facts determined in the exercise of his right to freedom of opinion, also of constitutional rank. Nevertheless, argued the State, the right to express freely thoughts, ideas or opinions contain in article 57 of the Constitution is not absolute since such norm