Consequently, it determined that the judgment therefore suffered from the “defect of a failure to provide a statement of reasons.”60 C.2. Second judicial proceedings 49. On July 11, 2012, an order was issued for the Second Trial Court to open an oral public trial on August 1, 2014. On September 4, 2014, the first instance judgment was delivered in which the Court acquitted the accused of the deaths of the alleged victims. It based its decision, above all, on the statements made by the accused and on the criterion, “pursuant to sound judgment based on the rule of logic, scientific expertise and the dictums of experience, […] there was no express indication or element of evidence to determine that the accused […] acted intentionally and, in particular, with malice; and this court considers that they acted in fulfillment of their duty as police officers.”61 50. On October 28, 2018, the Second Trial Court issued an order recording that the Public Prosecution Service had not filed an appeal and, therefore, required that the judicial file be archived.62 D. The alleged threats and harassment by police officers of the friends and family members of Octavio Ignacio Díaz Álvarez and the brothers, David Octavio and Robert Ignacio Díaz 51. On May 2, 2003, Alexandra Gualdrón and Enmary Dahiana Cava filed a complaint based on “the constant persecution and harassment that they were being subjected to” by the police force involved, and the events of April 26, 2003, when they had been subjected to violation of their home, verbal aggression, threats with a firearm and unlawful deprivation of liberty of Miguel Ángel Díaz Loreto. Regarding these events, the State advised that the Public Prosecution Service had investigated the corresponding complaints. The representatives indicated that they also had been subject to threats, harassment and persecution as a result of which, on May 20, 2003, they had needed to request measures of protection63 and these were granted by the Trial Court of the Criminal Judicial Circuit of Aragua state.64 VII. MERITS 52. In this case, the Court must examine the international responsibility of the State for the alleged violation of various rights of the Convention in relation to the deaths of Robert Ignacio Díaz Loreto, David Octavio Díaz Loreto and Octavio Ignacio Díaz Álvarez. It has been argued that these deaths occurred at the hands of agents of the state Police Force, and took place in a context of extrajudicial executions that existed in Venezuela at the time the events occurred. The Court will now examine the arguments on the merits in the following order: (a) Decision of Contingent Chamber No. 66 of the Appellate Court of the Criminal Judicial Circuit of Aragua state of December 14, 2011 (evidence file, folios 172 to 184). 60 Judgment of the Criminal Trial Court of the Criminal Judicial Circuit of Aragua state of September 4, 2014 (evidence file, folio 6579). 61 Paragraphs 14 and 15 of article 111 of the Organic Criminal Procedural Code (COPP) in force stipulate that: “During criminal proceedings, the obligations of the Public Prosecution Service are: 14. To file remedies against decisions taken in the cases in which it intervenes. 15. To protect the interests of the victims in the proceedings […].” Thus, since the Court does not have access to the order of October 28, 2018, it is unaware of whether the Public Prosecution Service failed to present an appeal because, based on the powers conferred by this article, this is one of its powers. 62 63 833). Cf. Communication of the Aragua state superior prosecutor of May 20, 2003 (evidence file, folios 832 and Cf. Decision of the First Supervisory Trial Court of the Aragua state Judicial Circuit of July 2, 2003 (evidence file, folios 3890 to 3892). 64 -17-