VI FACTS 29. In this chapter, the Court will establish the facts of the case based on the factual framework submitted to its consideration by the Inter-American Commission in relation to the following aspects: (a) Legal framework; (b) Ronald Moya Chacón and Freddy Parrales Chaves; (c) Publication of the article in La Nación on December 17, 2005; (d) domestic proceedings instituted as a result of that publication, and (e) subsequent cassation proceedings before the Supreme Court of Justice. A. Legal framework 30. The Court notes that, in the instant case, Messrs. Moya Chacón and Parrales Chaves were prosecuted for the offense of libel established in article 7 of the Printing Act in relation to article 145 of the Criminal Code, as well as for the offense of defamation established in article 146 of the said Criminal Code. 23 They were finally acquitted in the criminal jurisdiction and convicted in the civil jurisdiction in application of Article 1045 of the Civil Code. 24 31. Article 7 of the Printing Act establishes: Anyone responsible for defamation or libel committed through the press shall be punished with from one to one hundred and twenty days’ detention. This sanction shall apply jointly to the authors of the publication and to the editors responsible for the newspaper, pamphlet or book in which it may have appeared. If the name of the responsible editors does not appear in the newspaper, pamphlet or book, the directors of the publishing company shall be considered as such for the effects of this article, and if there are no such directors, their responsibility shall revert to the owner of the publishing company. But, if this be leased or held by another person in any other capacity, the lessee or possessor of the publishing company shall assume the responsibility that falls to the owner, provided that the Governor of the province has been advised of this tenure. If the defamatory or libelous publication has not been made in a newspaper, pamphlet or book, the authors and the director or owner or lessee or possessor of the publishing company shall be held jointly responsible pursuant to the rule established in their regard in the preceding paragraph. 32. Regarding the current status of the said article 7 of the Printing Act, the Court underlines that the State has indicated that, owing to a judgment delivered by the Third Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice on December 18, 2009, this provision has been abrogated. However, in its final written arguments, the State indicated that discussions on the status of this article had “not been finalized” under the laws of Costa Rica and, at this time, “conflicting opinions” existed in this regard. 33. Meanwhile, article 145 of the Criminal Code establishes that “[a]nyone who insults the dignity or decorum of another person, by word or act, either in their presence or by means of a communication addressed to them shall be penalized with a fine based on 23 Cf. Second Circuit Criminal Court of San José, Goicoechea, Judgment of January 10, 2007 (evidence file, folios 16 and 23). Cf. Second Circuit Criminal Court of San José, Goicoechea, Judgment of January 10, 2007 (evidence file, folio 21). 24 10