16 The self-censorship has been one of the most pernicious and immediate effects of the conviction. The alleged victim has held back from publishing articles whose facts he had confirmed to be true; that hesitation is caused by a fear of having to face another criminal action. Mr. Herrera Ulloa hopes that the Court “will nullify the judgment that convicted him” in the criminal and civil actions. He hopes “nothing like this ever happens again” and that neither he nor any colleague ever has to endure this kind of “constant self-censorship.” The alleged victim believes no Costa Rican citizen should ever be treated “like a criminal” for airing matters of public interest, as happened in this case. He also hopes that Costa Rica will “decriminalize the so-called crimes against honor” so that no one else journalist or otherwise- who, for the sake of a legitimate interest, denounces a public official and is branded a criminal for it. Anyone who is prosecuted must also be able to expect a reliable second instance, not what happened in his case where he was never given the opportunity to file an appeal with a court of second instance, to refute “the lies in the judment [,] in a cassation proceeding.” The magistrates who review a case must “not have preconceived ideas, biases, [or] opinions on that case.” No restrictions should be imposed on the information that newspapers publish on the internet in connection with reports that appear in the print version of the paper. Furthermore, the alleged victim would have no way of paying the sixty-million colones in civil damages; the three million eight hundred ten thousand colones in personal damages and costs that he and the newspaper “La Nación,” having been found jointly and severally liable, were ordered to pay; or the fine of three hundred thousand colones that he was personally ordered to pay. From a personal standpoint, although the harm he has suffered is irreparable, he believes that the Costa Rican State owes him and his family, who have suffered through this process with him, fair compensation. Finally, journalist Herrera Ulloa requested that the “Costa Rican State acknowledge the injustice done to him and the error it has made.” All he is seeking is “justice […], simply that.” b. Testimony of Fernán Vargas Rohrmoser, alleged victim in the case Fernán Vargas Rohrmoser is an attorney and notary public. At the time of the events in this case, he was Chairman of the Board of Directors of the newspaper “La Nación” and was responsible for overseeing its corporate interests. He is currently Vice Chairman of the Board of Directors. In the present case, the judgment that sentenced the newspaper “La Nación” and Mr. Mauricio Herrera Ulloa to pay moral damages has adverse consequences for the paper as a business. A court ruling of that nature “naturally affects the newspaper’s credibility, forces the Board of Directors […] to stress the established procedures […] the editing of the newspaper to avoid […] a guilty verdict.” All this lessens the independence of the newspaper’s director, who has to constantly remind himself of “the danger that threatens a newspaper when legal charges are filed against it.” All this