40. On September 9, 2002, Mr. Nissen Pessolani filed his pleadings brief, requesting his acquittal.38 On April 7, 2003, the JEM, by means of judgment No. 02/03, resolved "to remove Mr. Nissen Pessolani [...] for poor performance of his duties, in accordance with to subparagraphs (b), (g) and (n) of Article 14 of Law No. 1084/97 [...].” It found, in effect, that the defendant continued to intervene in the criminal case, disregarding the new provisions on the distribution of cases in turn, and that he exerted pressure on declarants and defendants in the proceedings; that throughout the course of the investigation under his charge, the defendant sought information and made statements to the press and third parties that transcended "the delicate framework of confidentiality that the criminal investigation has in its preliminary period, thus affecting the honor, reputation, and presumption of innocence" of the accused party and that during the process before the JEM, the defendant displayed behaviors that constitute grounds for removal, upon requesting that an expert from the Public Prosecutor's Office perform an expert analysis of the signature of his accuser, without having denounced before the JEM any suspicion about the authenticity of the document.39 The judgment was signed by the JEM Vice President and five other members. 41. On April 10, 2003, Mr. Nissen Pessolani filed an appeal for clarification and reversal against judgment No. /03. It requested clarification of the circumstance of the communication of the judgment to the Chambers of Congress, the Supreme Court of Justice and the Council of Magistrates.40 Such appeal was declared inadmissible on April 22, 2003 by judgment No. 03/03. The JEM argued that the appeal was not admissible "given that the appellant requested clarifications on matters that were manifestly set forth in Article 31 of Law No. 1084."41 42. During the trial, several media outlets covered the trial and denounced alleged political pressures on the members of the JEM.42 The press also reported on an investigation initiated in December 2002 by Prosecutor Nissen into an allegedly stolen vehicle that was apparently owned by the president of the JEM.43 Subsequently, it was also reported that another JEM member was involved in an investigation into possession of a stolen car.44 Cf. Closing brief and conclusion of the defense submitted by Alejandro Nissen Pessolani to the president of the JEM on September 9, 2002 (case file of evidence, folios 3486 to 3566). 38 39 Cf. Judgment No. 02/03 issued by the JEM on April 7, 2003 (case file of evidence, folios 3592 to 3618). Cf. Appeal for clarification and reversal filed by Alejandro Nissen Pessolani before the JEM on April 10, 2003 (case file of evidence, folio 3632). 40 41 Order No. 03/03 issued by the JEM on April 22, 2003 (case file of evidence, folio 3636 and 3637). Cf. "[R.] implement to keep Prosecutor Nissen from investigating" ABC Color newspaper of March 31, 2003. This article reports on a conversation between the former secretary of the presidency with the president of JEM about the opinions needed to dismiss Prosecutor Nissen (case file of evidence, folio 4); "Nissen procedure in the Jury was irregular from the start," Judicial news of April 13, 2003 (case file of evidence, folio 5); "[L.] called for removal of the prosecutor who was investigating corrupt politicians," ABC Color newspaper of unreadable date 2003 (case file of evidence, folio 6); "Jury attempts to remove the prosecutor that ordered the arrest of Argaña, court registrar," ABC color newspaper of July 31, 2002 (case file of evidence, folio 2725); "Jury made up of pro-Argaña members insists on removing Prosecutor Nissen," ABC newspaper of August 15, 2002 (case file of evidence, page 2928); "Reported Prosecutors looking into legal action to stop pressure on them," La Nación newspaper, undated (case file of evidence, page 2930). 42 43 Cf. "Investigation of [G.H.] for possession of a stolen car", ABC newspaper of April 4, 2003 (case file of evidence, folio 2726) and "Charge [G.H] with "mau" vehicle possession, ABC newspaper of April 8, 2003 (case file of evidence, folio 2727). 44 Cf. Newspaper article "Justice department to decide whether there will be a public, oral trial, or not for [C.K.]" ABC newspaper, October 31, 2003 (case file of evidence, folio 2747). 14