the Company El Universo54. On September 30, Emilio Palacio Urrutia filed a brief with the Second Criminal Chamber of the Provincial Court of Justice of Guayas, requesting that the decision of September 26, 2011, regarding the declaration of "abandonment" of the "nullity and appeal" remedies and the "execution of the judgment”55. 2.3.2 Cassation appeal 43. On September 27, 28 and 30, 2011, Emilio Palacio Urrutia, the representatives of El Universo, César Pérez Barriga, Carlos Eduardo Pérez Barriga, and Carlos Nicolás Pérez Lapentti, filed a cassation appeal56. 44. On October 4, 2011, the Second Criminal Chamber of the Provincial Court of Justice of Guayas declared "inadmissible" the cassation appeal filed by Emilio Palacio Urrutia because he was not present, nor his lawyers, in the oral appeal hearing57. On October 21, 2011, the then president expressed in writing the nullity of the cassation appeals for those who did not attend the appeal hearing58. 45. On December 27, 2011, the Second Criminal Chamber of the National Court of Justice, which heard the case on November 7, decided to deny the cassation appeal filed by Emilio Palacio Urrutia, and set the hearing to substantiate the cassation appeal with respect to César Pérez Barriga, Carlos Eduardo Pérez Barriga, and Carlos Nicolás Pérez Lapentti for January 13, 201259. 46. After a series of procedural acts, on February 15, 2012, the cassation appeal court hearing set by the National Court was held60. At the hearing, the president of the court prevented Emilio Palacio’s lawyer from intervening in his defense on the understanding that he was not part of the appeal under study61, which had been denied with the denial of the cassation appeal filed. On February 17, the National Court decided by judgment and declared firm the criminal convictions,62 and ten days later notified the judgment63. The court decision states that the "court of appeal, in issuing a conviction against the appellants imposing the penalties and compensation described therein have not violated the principles, international precedents, laws applicable to the case, the existence of animus injuriandi, and that the participation of the accused had been assessed and determined according to the law"64. 2.3.3 Factual remedy filed by Emilio Palacio Urrutia 47. On October 7, 2011, Emilio Palacio filed a factual appeal. In the letter, he mentioned that Article 327 of the Criminal Procedure Code states that "[w]hen a process involving several co-defendants, the appeal filed by one of them will benefit the others, provided that the decision is not based on exclusively personal grounds." In this regard, he stated that "the order issued by that Chamber on October 4, 2011 [...] expressly provides that the cassation appeal filed by Messrs. César Enrique Pérez Barriga, Carlos Eduardo Pérez Barriga, and Carlos Nicolás Pérez Lapentti, and by the representatives of the company EL UNIVERSO was admitted" and that "having been admitted the cassation appeal to these procedural parts, it was applicable for obvious reasons to the cassation appeal filed by me, which has been denied by the Chamber”65. 48. On October 7, 2011, the Second Chamber of the Provincial Court of Guayas decided to admit the factual appeal "to be the Superior, the Criminal Chamber of the National Court of Justice, who by lottery Annex 25. Brief of Abandonment of Nullity and Appeal remedies. Annex No. 80 of the Initial Petition presented to the IACHR on October 24, 2011. 54 55 Annex 26. Brief against Order. Annex No. 81 of the Initial Petition presented to the IACHR on October 24, 2011. 56 Annex 27. Cassation Appel briefs. Annexes No. 77, 78 and 79 of the Initial Petition presented to the IACHR on October 24, 2011. 57 Annex 28. Inadmissibility of cassation appeal. Annex No. 82 of the Initial Petition presented to the IACHR on October 24, 201. 58 Fact affirmed by the State in its brief of observations submitted to the Commission on December 13, 2016. 59 Fact affirmed by the State in its brief of observations submitted to the Commission on December 13, 2016. 60 Fact affirmed by the State in its brief of observations submitted to the Commission on December 13, 2016. 61 Fact affirmed by the State in its brief of observations submitted to the Commission on December 13, 2016. 62 Fact affirmed by the State in its brief of observations submitted to the Commission on December 13, 2016. 63 Fact affirmed by the State in its brief of observations submitted to the Commission on December 13, 2016. 64 Fact affirmed by the State in its brief of observations submitted to the Commission on December 13, 2016. 65 Annex 29. Factual remedy filed by Emilio Palacio. Annex No. 83 of the Initial Petition presented to the IACHR on October 24, 2011. 11