75 h) the right to appeal the judgment to a higher court. 3. A confession of guilt by the accused shall be valid only if it is made without coercion of any kind. 4. An accused person acquitted by a non-appealable judgment shall not be subjected to a new trial for the same cause. 5. Criminal proceedings shall be public, except insofar as may be necessary to protect the interests of justice. 185. Article 25 de la American Convention provides that: 1. Everyone has the right to simple and prompt recourse, or any other effective recourse, to a competent court or tribunal for protection against acts that violate his fundamental rights recognized by the constitution or laws of the state concerned or by this Convention, even though such violation may have been committed by persons acting in the course of their official duties. 2. The States Parties undertake: a) to ensure that any person claiming such remedy shall have his rights determined by the competent authority provided for by the legal system of the state; b) to develop the possibilities of judicial remedy; and c) to ensure that the competent authorities shall enforce such remedies when granted. 186. This Court observes, in the first place, that the State, when replying to the application, recognized its international responsibility in the following terms: [Guatemala] accepts the facts set out in numeral II of the application in the case of Efraín Bámaca Velásquez, inasmuch as it has still not been possible to identify the persons or person criminally responsible for the unlawful acts against Mr. Bámaca [Velásquez] and, thus, clarify his disappearance, with a reservation regarding the Commission's assertion in numeral II, subparagraph 2, because it has not been possible to confirm the circumstances of the disappearance of Mr. Bámaca [Velásquez] in the domestic proceedings. This act of the State shows its good faith towards the international commitments assumed when it signed and ratified the American Convention on Human Rights and accepted the obligatory jurisdiction of this Court. 187. With regard to Bámaca Velásquez, the State expressly left outside its recognition of responsibility (supra 24) “the Commission's assertion in numeral II, subparagraph 2” of the application, that is to say, that the alleged victim “disappeared after an exchange of fire between the Army and the guerrilla near the Ixcucua River [...and] that the Guatemalan armed forces captured Mr. Bámaca alive after the skirmish and imprisoned him secretly in several military detachments, where they tortured and, eventually executed him”. Therefore, it does not recognize the detention, torture and disappearance of Bámaca Velásquez, nor does it state that it has accepted the violation of his guarantees embodied in Article 8 and the judicial protection established in Article 25 of the Convention, so that it corresponds to the Court to analyze this alleged violation based on the elements presented by the parties.