32 113. Based on the foregoing, it is evident that, even though the purpose of the condemnation has been legitimate, the State has not fulfilled the requirements established in the American Convention by not complying with the procedural terms contemplated in the domestic legislation and established as necessary procedural conditions within the domestic venue, violating the nullum crimen nulla poena sine lege praevia principle [principle of legality] and therefore, the condemnation proceeding has been arbitrary. 114. The Court confirms that the lack of payment of a just compensation, in accordance with the standards already established (supra para. 95 to 110) is evident in the instant case and therefore, considers that the deprivation of the property without the payment of a just compensation constitutes a violation of the right to property embodied in Article 21(2) of the Convention. * * * 115. Furthermore, the Court notes that Mrs. Salvador Chiriboga had incorrectly paid taxes and penalties, during the years 1991 and 2007.112 To such regard, the State recognized it made a mistake when collecting the taxes and penalties from Mrs. Salvador Chiriboga and so, by means of an order from the Municipal Council, decreed the repayment of all the moneys improperly paid. However, the alleged victim reasserted that the total repayment of all the moneys improperly paid has still not been carried out. At the discretion of the Court, in the instant case, the payment of taxes and penalties evidence the imposition of additional charges, which are considered excessive and out of proportion for Mrs. Salvador Chiriboga, and which represents an aggravating circumstance in relation to the violation of the right to property.113 * * * 116. Finally, the Court holds that the State deprived Mrs. María Salvador Chiriboga of the right to property for legal and well-grounded reasons of public utility, which consisted in the protection of the environment through the building of the Metropolitan Park. Notwithstanding, the State did not comply with the requirements necessary to restrict the right to property provided for in the general principles of international law and explicitly established in the American Convention. 117. Specially, the State failed to comply with the stipulations of the law, by violating the judicial protection and guarantees, given the fact that the remedies filed exceeded the reasonable term and were ineffective. The foregoing has indefinitely deprived the victim of her property, as well as of the payment of a just compensation, which has 112 At the public hearing, Mrs. Salvador Chiriboga stated that she paid all the taxes up to the date of her statement and has been doing it “for fear of a seizure if she did not pay”. Spite of the payment of taxes, she has not been able to use the property. Other witnesses, such as José Luis Paredes Sánchez, who rendered an affidavit before the Court, stated that despite the fact that the State condemned his property, he is obliged to pay the taxes. Even further, the expert witness Edgar Neira Orellana stated that the surcharge on non-serviced building areas is pointless to collect over those properties located in rural areas, for agriculture use; it has sense when the real estate is located within the urban parameters and punishes the lack of building or fosters the building within certain Municipality. 113 Cf. Case of Chaparro Álvarez and Lapo Íñiguez, supra note 47, para. 200 a 218.