31 [i]n conformity of what is established by Article 101 of the Criminal Code95, all action extinguishes in the time and with the conditions established by Law. The mentioned substantive criminal disposition with regards to the concerning matter, states that in case a crime of public action that goes without trial and that is reprimanded with incarceration will extinguish in 10 years. The period will be counted from the perpetration of the infraction of said crime. In the same crimes of public action if trial begins before this deadline has arrived, the action will extinguish in 10 years starting from the action to go ahead with prosecution. In the present case, as is stated before, preferably the action to go ahead with prosecution is ordered on January 10, 1997 will the purpose to investigate the death of who in life was named [Laura] Susana Albán-Cornejo, a crime that is punishable by incarceration. Defendant Fabián Ernesto Espinoza-Cuesta has submitted certificates of Criminal Courts and Tribunals of Pichincha that he has not been set to trial nor sentenced for another criminal cause. In other means, the extinguishment of the criminal action has not been interrupted. Based upon the previous considerations it deems that in the present cause, the legal dispositions embodied in Articles 101, 108 and 114 of the Criminal Code are fulfilled. In consequence, in use of [the] legal faculties and in compliance with [my] juridical duty to order the extinguishment of the criminal action in the […] cause.”96 91. On October 25, 2007, Laura Albán’s parents filed a motion for appeal against said order with the Fifth Criminal Court; such motion was allowed on October 19, 2007. As of the date of this Judgment, the appeal is still pending before the Superior Court of Justice of Quito.97 92. The Public Prosecutor’s Office is the body competent to institute investigation proceedings on its own motion, in accordance with the notitia criminis (the report of an offense having been committed) related to crimes which are publicly actionable.98 However, under the legislation in force at the time of the events, the victim or the 95 Art. 101 of the Criminal Code provides as follows: “[a]ll criminal actions shall be time-barred under the conditions established by law. In the exercise of the rights embodied by the extinguishment, the next rules will be followed: both in crimes prosecutable on an ex officio basis and in crimes for which charges must be pressed by a private party, a main consideration shall be whether, after commission of the crime, a trial has or has not been initiated. In cases of crimes prosecutable on an ex officio basis, if no trial has been initiated, the action to prosecute crimes punishable by incarceration shall expire within ten years; while actions to prosecute crimes punishable by prison shall expire within five years. In both cases, the commission of the crime shall be the starting point for time computation. In the same crimes prosecutable on an ex officio basis, if trial has been initiated before the deadlines have expired, the action to continue the cause will extinguish in the same terms counting from the court order to investigate the alleged crime.” 96 Cf. order issued by the Fifth Criminal Court on October 16, 2007 (file on merits, reparations, and costs, volume III, fs 496 and 497). 97 Cf. motion of appeal filed with the Fifth Criminal Court on October 25, 2007 (file on merits, reparations, and costs, volume III, pp. 522 to 524); and official letter issued by the Fifth Criminal Court on October 29, 2007 (file on merits, reparations, and costs, volume III, p. 524). 98 The aforementioned had been previously provided for under Articles 14, 21, and 23 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in force at the time of the events. Article 14 established that “[c]riminal actions are public by nature. They shall be generally exercised ex officio, although private complaints shall be allowed; however, in all cases established in Article 428 of this Code, they may only be exercised by means of private complaint.” Moreover, Article 21 established that “[t]he Office of the Prosecutor shall request the corresponding judges to institute criminal proceedings for the commission of any crime, and said request shall have grounds on the acquired knowledge of the crime.” Finally, Article 23 established that “[t]he intervention of the Office of the Prosecutor shall be compulsory in all criminal proceedings that, after the commission of a crime, have been initiated in the corresponding courts and tribunals, including cases in which there is a private complainant, provided that the crime is prosecutable on an ex officio basis.”