13 The witness knows Mr. Canese and, as a Director of CONEMPA, filed a criminal action against him for the offenses of slander and injuria in 1992. Ricardo Canese was sentenced in three instances and, subsequently, absolved in a review of judgment. In the witness’s opinion, this situation left unpunished offenses against the witness that had continued for more than ten years and which had been “adequately proved.” Owing to Mr. Canese’s statements and as a result of the political activities of Juan Carlos Wasmosy –who was associated with CONEMPA– as candidate for the presidency of the Republic, CONEMPA and the companies that were members of the consortium were subjected to a “vicious negative campaign,” of which Mr. Canese was one of the “mentors.” Mr. Canese’s statements had considerable economic impact on CONEMPA, which faced systematic difficulty in qualifying for or winning contracts; this, in turn, led to a reduction in the corporation’s personnel, which decreased from 800 employees to about 50. Mr. Canese’s declarations have had negative consequences on the witness’s public and private relationships. Throughout the proceedings for the offenses of slander and injuria and after he was sentenced, Mr. Canese carried out systematic and repeated activities tending to discredit CONEMPA and its directors. b) Testimonial statement of Ramón Jiménez Gaona, Chairman of the CONEMPA Board of Directors The witness knows Mr. Canese and, as Chairman of the CONEMPA Board of Directors, filed a criminal action against him for the offenses of slander and injuria, which resulted in a conviction in three instances. On August 7, 1992, the newspapers “ABC Color” and “Noticias” published statements attributed to Mr. Canese, in which, when referring to Juan Carlos Wasmosy –at that time a presidential candidate– he made indirect reference to the directors or owners of the companies that were members of CONEMPA. In these statements, Mr. Canese said that CONEMPA was the company that had “paid substantial dividends to the Dictator,” referring to General Alfredo Stroessner, and that “with the support of the Dictator’s family, the CONEMPA consortium enjoyed a monopoly for the Paraguayan part of the main civil works of Itaipú.” Throughout the proceedings against him, Mr. Canese and his lawyers introduced numerous delaying tactics, with the result that the proceedings continued for nine years, in three instances. Notwithstanding the judgment against him, Mr. Canese filed “other delaying remedies,” such as an appeal, and motions for dismissal and review, which were rejected. The Supreme Court of Justice of Paraguay admitted the third appeal for review with regard to all the sentences. Consequently, the offenses that had been “totally proved” against Mr. Canese remained unpunished, which is “one of the most disgraceful acts of the Supreme Court of Justice” of Paraguay.