an appropriate mechanism to rectify an erroneous conviction.298 This requirement is closely related to the following. d) Allowing a comprehensive review or examination of the judgment appealed: it must ensure the possibility of a comprehensive examination of the decision appealed. 299 Therefore, it must permit an analysis of the factual, probative and legal issues on which the contested judgment was based because, in jurisdictional activities, the determination of the facts and the application of the law are interdependent, so that an erroneous determination of the facts entails an erroneous or inappropriate application of the law. Consequently, the grounds for the admissibility of the appeal should make it possible to carry out a comprehensive examination of the contested aspects of the adverse judgment.300 In this way, it is possible to obtain a two-stage judicial ruling, because the comprehensive review of the judgment permits the reasoning to be confirmed and grants greater credibility to the State’s jurisdictional action, while providing greater security and protection to the rights of the person who has been convicted.301 e) Available to anyone who has been sentenced and convicted: the right to appeal the judgment cannot be effective if it is not guaranteed to everyone who has been sentenced and convicted, because the sentence is the expression of the exercise of the State’s punitive powers. It must be ensured even to the individual who has been sentenced in a judgment that revokes an acquittal.302 f) Observing the minimum procedural guarantees: appeal regimes must respect the minimum procedural guarantees that, pursuant to Article 8 of the Convention, are pertinent and necessary to decide the errors asserted by the appellant, without this entailing the need to conduct a new oral trial.303 b) The appeal system under the Criminal Procedural Code of Chile (Law No. 19,696 of 2000) 271. The Criminal Procedural Code also introduced substantial variations in the appeals regime adopted. It determined that “decisions issued by an oral criminal trial court could not be appealed” (Article 364) and established the appeal for annulment as the only means of contesting (“to invalidate”) the oral trial and the final judgment (Article 372). 272. The main pertinent provisions concerning appeals are transcribed below, as well as article 342 of the Criminal Procedural Code, which establishes the contents required of a judgment under pain of nullity, and article 297 on the assessment of the evidence, referred to article 342.c of this code: Article 297. Assessment of the evidence. The courts shall assess the evidence freely, but may not disregard the principles of logic, the lessons of experience, and scientifically established knowledge. The Court must refer in its reasoning to all the evidence produced, even the evidence that it may have rejected, in that case indicating why it rejected it. The assessment of the evidence in the judgment shall require an indication of the evidence used to substantiate each of the facts and circumstances that were found proved. This substantiation shall allow the reasoning used in order to reach the conclusions arrived at in the judgment to be reproduced. 298 Cf. Case of Mohamed v. Argentina, para.100, and Case of Liakat Ali Alibux v. Suriname, para. 86. 299 Cf. Case of Herrera Ulloa v. Costa Rica, para. 165, and Case of Liakat Ali Alibux v. Suriname, para. 56. 300 Cf. Case of Mohamed v. Argentina, para.100, and Case of Liakat Ali Alibux v. Suriname, para. 86. 301 Cf. Case of Barreto Leiva v. Venezuela, para. 89, and Case of Liakat Ali Alibux v. Suriname, para. 49. 302 Cf. Case of Mohamed v. Argentina, para.92, and Case of Liakat Ali Alibux v. Suriname, para. 84. 303 Cf. Case of Mohamed v. Argentina, para.101, and Case of Liakat Ali Alibux v. Suriname, para. 87. 94