49 charges against the individual accuser, that is to say it presumed him guilty.” To conclude, the representatives alleged that the criminal prosecution against Mr. Tristán Donoso was characterized by the existence of serious irregularities that amounted to a violation of his right to a fair trial, particularly his right to defense, to an investigation carried out by an independent and impartial authority, and to be presumed innocent, thus resulting in an infringement of the provisions of Articles 8(1) and 8(2) of the American Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) of such treaty. 160. The State contended that the proceedings initiated against Mr. Tristán Donoso “were carried out in compliance with due guarantees in favor of [the accused and the reporting party], that a decision was rendered within reasonable time and that the case was tried by competent, independent and impartial tribunals.” The accused and the claimant in the proceedings “had the opportunity to avail themselves of the remedies statutorily enacted to protect the rights they considered violated.” 161. The Court finds that in the application filed by the Commission reference is made to the criminal complaint filed by the former Attorney General against Mr. Tristán Donoso was handled by the Fiscalía Auxiliar de la República [Office of the Assistant Prosecutor], which, in the opinion of the representatives, was not an impartial and independent body qualified to investigate the aforementioned criminal complaint. Similarly, the application points out that “the Segundo Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Panamá [Panamá Superior Court of Justice Number Two] reversed the first instance judgment and convicted Mr. Tristán Donoso as the perpetrator of the crime of false accusation to the detriment of the Procurador General de la Nación [National Attorney General],” stating the grounds supporting the decision143. Consequently, the allegations of the representatives regarding the alleged organic subordination of the prosecutors in charge of the investigation and the presumption of innocence are based on facts contained in the application and, so, may be considered by this Court (supra para. 73.) 162. However, the Court finds that the allegations related to the alleged impossibility of the victim to act during the investigation and the alleged restriction of his access to the case record file are facts that are not contained in the application and that were not examined in Report on the Merits No. 114/06 of the InterAmerican Commission. Thus, such allegations will not be considered by the Tribunal. 2. i) Investigation conducted by the Public Attorneys 163. As regards the allegations of the representatives related to the hierarchical subordination of the prosecutors in charge of the investigation against Mr. Tristán Donoso to the former Attorney General – the individual accuser – the matter to be decided by the Tribunal is whether said organic subordination entails a violation of the right to due process established by the American Convention. 164. States parties may organize their criminal procedural system, as well as determine the function, the structure or the institutional place Public Attorneys in charge of criminal prosecution are to have, taking into account their specific needs and conditions, provided they comply with the purposes and obligations established in the American Convention. In cases where the legislation of a certain State sets 143 Cf. Brief containing the application (File on the Merits, Book I, folios 18, 32, and 33), and 2nd. Judgment No. 40 passed by the Segundo Tribunal Superior de Justicia [Superior Court of Justice Number Two], on April 1, 2005, supra note 98, folio 1950.