90. On September 10, 1996, the Supreme Court of Justice of the province of Buenos Aires declared the special appeal on unconstitutionality inadmissible, indicating that the grounds submitted concerned “issues that were unrelated to that appeal, but rather concerned the appeal of non-applicability of the law.” 132 The presumed victims filed an appeal for reversal of this decision indicating that “even though the Appellate Chamber erroneously admitted the remedy […] of unconstitutionality, an error that the defense had not noted at the time, it was clear from what had been said […] that an appeal for declaration of nullity and nonapplicability of the law had been filed.” 133 Nevertheless, this appeal was declared inadmissible. 134 Subsequently, Messrs. Mémoli filed a special federal appeal before the same Supreme Court of Justice, which the latter rejected on November 26, 1996. 135 Following the rejection of this special appeal, the presumed victims filed a remedy of complaint before the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation, which was found inadmissible on October 3, 1997, based on the provisions of article 280 of the Code of Civil and Commercial Procedure of the Nation. 136 Following this decision, the criminal judgment was final. 137 The presumed victims filed another appeal for reconsideration of the judgment, but this was rejected on December 10, 1997. 138 B.4) Facts subsequent to the criminal proceeding 91. On November 18, 2009, Law 26,551 was enacted amending articles of the Criminal Code of the Nation relating to the offenses of defamation and libel. This law modified the criminal definition of defamation, based on which the presumed victims in this case had been convicted. 139 The Law was promulgated on November 26, 2009. 92. On November 23, 2009, the presumed victims filed an appeal on unconstitutionality before the Appellate and Criminal Guarantees Chamber requesting the acquittal of the two convicted men and that an order be issued to the civil court that was hearing the case for 132 Judgment of the Supreme Court of Justice of the province of Buenos Aires of September 10, 1996, case No. 63.249 (file of annexes to the Merits Report, annex 27, folio 325). 133 Appeal for reversal of September 19, 1996 (file of proceedings before the Commission, folio 457). 134 Cf. Decision of September 23, 1996 (file of annexes to the State’s final written arguments, annex III, folio 5457). 135 Cf. Special federal appeal filed on October 8, 1996 (file of annexes to the Merits Report, annex 1, folios 6 to 61) and Judgment of the Supreme Court of Justice of the province of Buenos Aires of November 26, 1996, case No. 63,249 (file of annexes to the Merits Report, annex 32, folios 338 and 339). 136 Cf. Remedy of complaint of December 11, 1996 (file of annexes to the Merits Report, annex 29, folios 329 to 332) and judgment of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation of October 3, 1997, case No. 55,964 (file of annexes to the Merits Report, annex 7, folio 227). That same day, the presumed victims filed an appeal for reversal before the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation against the same decision of November 26, 1996, which was rejected on December 27, 1996. Cf. Appeal for reversal of December 11, 1996 (file of proceedings before the Commission, folio 462) and decision of December 27, 1996 (file of proceedings before the Commission, folio 466). 137 Cf. Judgment of December 9, 2009 (file of annexes to the answer, annex 2, folio 2820). 138 Cf. Appeal for reconsideration of the judgment of October 9, 1997 (file of proceedings before the Commission, folios 469 to 471) and judgment of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation of December 10, 1997, case No. 55,964 (file of annexes to the Merits Report, annex 8, folio 229). 139 The new article 110 of the Criminal Code establishes: “[a]nyone who intentionally dishonors or discredits a particular individual shall be punished by a fine of one thousand five hundred pesos ($1,500) to twenty thousand pesos ($20,000). In no instance shall expressions referring to matters of public interest or those that are not affirmative constitute the offense of defamation. Nor shall words harmful to honor constitute the offense of defamation when they are relevant to a matter of public interest. Law 26,551, available at: http://www.infoleg.gob.ar/infolegInternet/annexes/160000-164999/160774/norma.htm (cited by the Commission). 36