34 proceeding” before the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice of Paraguay. They also requested that the judgment of March 22, 1994, be annulled (supra para. 69(15)), that decision and judgment No. 18 of November 4, 1997, be annulled (supra para. 69(20)) and that a “final stay of proceedings” be declared, based, inter alia, on “the recent entry into force of the new Code of Criminal Procedure.”66 69(37) On October 3, 2000, the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice of Paraguay issued interlocutory order No. 1645, with its ruling on the action on unconstitutionality filed by Mr. Canese and his lawyer on November 19, 1997 (supra para. 69(25), 69(28) and 69(35)). In this decision, based on the actuary’s report indicating that “the last judicial action designed to advance the instant case is the decision of July 21, 1998,” the Constitutional Chamber declared that “the case had extinguished,” because “more than six months ha[d] passed, and the proceedings had not been prosecuted during that period, which demonstrated that the plaintiff in the […] action, had abandoned the case.”67 69(38) On October 30, 2000, Mr. Canese and his lawyer filed a motion for dismissal against interlocutory order No. 1645 of October 4, 2000, before the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice of Paraguay (supra para. 69(37)), “owing to a substantive error and lack of impartiality,” because “there was a substantive error in the actuary’s report,” since, inter alia, “approximately twenty judicial proceedings had been undertaken subsequent to July 21, 1998.”68 69(39) On December 12, 2000, the complainants’ lawyer submitted a brief, in which he “provide[d] grounds for the appeal filed against decision and judgment No. 18 of November 4, 1997, regarding the length of the sentence and the amount of the fine imposed” (supra para. 69(21)), which the Third Chamber of the Court of Criminal Appeal had admitted on November 19, 1997 (supra para. 69(24)).69 66 Cf. appeal for review filed by Ricardo Canese and his lawyers before the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice of Paraguay on March 8, 2000 (copy of the file of the criminal proceeding against Ricardo Canese for the offenses of slander and injuria before the First Criminal Trial Court, file of attachments to the brief answering the application, and with observations on the brief with requests and arguments, tome II, attachment 4, folios 1141 to 1144). 67 Cf. interlocutory order No. 1645 issued by the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice of Paraguay on October 4, 2000 (copy of the file on the action on unconstitutionality in the case “Ricardo Canese, for slander and injuria” before the Supreme Court of Justice of Paraguay, file of attachments to the brief answering the application, and with observations on the brief with requests and arguments, tome II, attachment 4, folio 1387). 68 Cf. motion for dismissal filed by Ricardo Canese and his lawyer before the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice of Paraguay on October 30, 2000 (copy of the file on the action on unconstitutionality in the case “Ricardo Canese, for slander and injuria” before the Supreme Court of Justice of Paraguay, file of attachments to the brief answering the application, and with observations on the brief with requests and arguments, tome I, attachment 4, folios 1389 to 1395). 69 Cf. brief submitted by the complainants’ lawyer to the Supreme Court of Justice of Paraguay on December 12, 2000 (copy of the file of the criminal proceeding against Ricardo Canese for the offenses of slander and injuria before the First Criminal Trial Court, file of attachments to the brief answering the application, and with observations on the brief with requests and arguments, tome I, attachment 4, folios 1127 to 1130).