33 his wife and serve notice of the indictment issued in the proceedings against him.93 Both petitions were granted by means of Order No. 139 of May 23, 2002.94 106. On January 16, 2004, the [Panamá Province Criminal Circuit Court Number Nine] acquitted Mr. Tristán Donoso of a general crime against honor to the detriment of José Antonio Sossa and rejected the ancillary request for damages to the benefit of the latter,95 as it found that: the main pieces of evidence that compose this dossier do not prove beyond reasonable legal doubt that Mr. TRISTÁN DONOSO acted maliciously since there is no sufficient testimonial evidence to support the allegation that, upon attributing liability for the illegal recording of 96 calls, the individual accuser was aware of the actual source of such recording. 107. On February 11, 2004, Panamá First Court Circuit Public Prosecutor Number Four [Office of the First Panamá Court Circuit Prosecutor Number Four] filed an appeal against such judgment97 and on April 1, 2005, the Segundo Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Panamá [Panamá Superior Court of Justice Number Two] reversed the acquittal, sentencing Mr. Tristán Donoso to imprisonment for 18 months and disqualification to hold public office for an equal term for having found him to be the perpetrator of the crime of defamation to the detriment of José Antonio Sossa and substituting the imprisonment imposed by 75 days’ fine calculated on a 10 balboas daily basis (total B/.750.00). Furthermore, the aforementioned authority granted compensation for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damages caused to the victim “as is to be assessed”, after liquidation before the lower Court.98 Among other considerations, the Segundo Tribunal Superior de Justicia [Superior Court of Justice Number Two] found that: [t]he arguments set forth by the Court having heard the case in the first instance are inadmissible as it acquitted the accused stating that there is no animus injuriandi, because the accused was not certain about the falsehood of the allegations brought against Mr. SOSSA. The reasons provided should not be deemed valid in the sense that a kind of 93 Cf. Motions filed by the Fiscal Cuarto del Primer Circuito Judicial de Panamá [Panamá First Court Circuit Public Attorney Number Four] (Case File of Appendixes to the motions, pleadings and evidence brief, Book II, Appendix 38, folio 2606, and Appendix 39, folio 2607). 94 Cf. Ruling No. 139, of the Juzgado Noveno de Circuito Penal del Primer Circuito Judicial de Panamá [Panamá First Court Circuit Criminal Circuit Court Number Nine] on May 23, 2002 (Case File of Appendixes to the motions, pleadings and evidence brief, Book II, Appendix 38, folio 2606, and Appendix 40, folios 2608 and 2609). 95 Cf. Judgment No. SA-2 rendered by the Juzgado Noveno de Circuito Penal del Primer Circuito Judicial de Panamá [Panamá First Court Circuit Criminal Circuit Court Number Nine] on January 16, 2004, supra note 81, folios 1571 to 1604. 96 Cf. Judgment No. SA-2 rendered by the Juzgado Noveno de Circuito Penal del Primer Circuito Judicial de Panamá [Panamá First Court Circuit Criminal Circuit Court Number Nine] on January 16, 2004 supra note 81, folio 2742. 97 Cf. Argument on appeal against Judgment No. SA-2 rendered by the Juzgado Noveno de Circuito Penal del Primer Circuito Judicial de Panamá [Panamá First Court Circuit Criminal Circuit Court Number Nine] on January 16, 2004 (Case File of Appendixes to the motions, pleadings and evidence brief, Book II, Appendix 45, folios 2750 to 2767). 98 Cf. 2nd Judgment No. 40 passed by the Segundo Tribunal Superior de Justicia [Superior Court of Justice Number Two] on April 1, 2005 (Case File of Appendixes to the Application, Book II, Appendix 47, folio 1952).