Emilio Palacio Urrutia, in the terms of paragraphs 23 to 30, 87 to 127, 145 to 150, and 153 to 160 of this judgment. Judges Eduardo Vio Grossi and Eugenio Raúl Zaffaroni disagree. By five votes in favor and one against, that: 3. The State is responsible for the violation of the rights to freedom of expression and the principle of legality, established in articles 13 and 9 of the American Convention on Human Rights, in relation to articles 1(1) and 2 of the same instrument, to the detriment of Carlos Nicolás Pérez Lapentti, Carlos Eduardo Pérez Barriga and César Enrique Pérez Barriga, in the terms of paragraphs 23 to 30, and 87 to 127 of this judgment. Judge Eugenio Raúl Zaffaroni disagrees. 4. The State is responsible for the violation of the rights to judicial guarantees and judicial protection, established in Articles 8 and 25 of the American Convention on Human Rights, in relation to Articles 1(1) and 2 of the same instrument, to the detriment of Emilio Palacio Urrutia, Carlos Nicolás Pérez Lapentti, Carlos Eduardo Pérez Barriga and César Enrique Pérez Barriga, in the terms of paragraphs 23 to 30 of this judgment. Judge Eugenio Raúl Zaffaroni disagrees. Unanimously, that: 5. The State is not responsible for the violation of the right to personal liberty established in Article 7 of the American Convention on Human Rights, in relation to Article 1(1) of the same instrument, to the detriment of Emilio Palacio Urrutia, Carlos Nicolás Pérez Lapentti , Carlos Eduardo Pérez Barriga and César Enrique Pérez Barriga, in the terms of paragraphs 130 to 133 of this judgment. 6. The State is not responsible for the violation of the right to property established in Article 21 of the American Convention on Human Rights, in relation to Article 1(1) of the same instrument, to the detriment of Emilio Palacio Urrutia, Carlos Nicolás Pérez Lapentti, Carlos Eduardo Pérez Barriga and César Enrique Pérez Barriga, in the terms of paragraphs 136 to 142 of this judgment. AND ESTABLISHES By five votes in favor and one against, that: 7. This Judgment constitutes, in itself, a form of reparation. Judge Eugenio Raúl Zaffaroni disagrees. Unanimously, that: 8. The State will adopt all necessary measures to annul the judgment passed against Emilio Palacio Urrutia, Carlos Nicolás Pérez Lapentti, Carlos Eduardo Pérez Barriga and César Enrique Pérez Barriga and the consequences derived from it, in the terms of paragraph 171 of this judgment. 64