18 ARTICLES 8(1) (RIGHT TO FAIR TRIAL)30 AND 25(1) (JUDICIAL PROTECTION)31 IN RELATION TO ARTICLE 1(1) (OBLIGATION TO RESPECT RIGHTS)32 OF THE AMERICAN CONVENTION 56. The arguments of the Commission and the representatives revolved around the following facts: a) the next of kin of Laura Albán repeatedly requested that the Metropolitan Hospital release the medical file, which was only made available by said institution after the next of kin resorted to the civil courts. Upon receiving the medical file, the civil judge failed to “report the notitia criminis of the death of Laura Albán to a criminal judge.”33 The judge also failed to notify the victims that the medical file was available, even though such documents were critical to learning the facts of and circumstances surrounding the death of Laura Albán and “establishing whether criminal, civil or other responsibility applied”; b) the next of kin of Miss Albán-Cornejo appeared before the Honor Tribunal and lodged a complaint for malpractice against Dr. Ramiro Montenegro-López and “every person, physician, nurse and paramedic” involved in the events, who were to be identified by the aforementioned doctor. They claimed that said Honor Tribunal showed a complete lack of interest in finding the truth of the facts and establishing responsibility, and took over one year to rule, even though the period therefore prescribed in Article 24 of the Ecuadorian Medical Federation Law (Ley de la Federación Médica Ecuatoriana) was sixty days; c) the State did not take any steps aimed at investigating the death of Laura Albán as from the attempt at filing the complaint on August 3, 1995. Since the then Attorney General Fernando Casares did not receive the complaint, Miss Albán-Cornejo’s parents waited over one year to re-submit the complaint to the new Attorney General, Guillermo Castro-Dager; d) through the order of December 13, 1999, the Sixth Chamber of the Superior Court of Justice of Quito (hereinafter, the “Sixth Chamber”) changed the charges against Dr. Montenegro-López on the grounds that his actions were covered by Article 459,34 rather than Article 45635, as 30 Article 8(1) (Right to Fair Trial) of the Convention provides as follows: [e]very person has the right to a hearing, with due guarantees and within a reasonable time, by a competent, independent, and impartial tribunal, previously established by law, in the substantiation of any accusation of a criminal nature made against him or for the determination of his rights and obligations of a civil, labor, fiscal, or any other nature. 31 Article 25(1) (Right to Judicial Protection) of the Convention provides as follows: [e]veryone 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. 32 Article 1(1) of the Convention provides that: [t]he States Parties to this Convention undertake to respect the rights and freedoms recognized herein and to ensure to all persons subject to their jurisdiction the free and full exercise of those rights and freedoms, without any discrimination for reasons of race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, economic status, birth, or any other social condition. 33 Article 292 of the Code of Criminal Procedure provided as follows: “[a]ny public or Police officer who, after learning that a crime has been perpetrated, fails to immediately report the occurrence to an examining judge shall be punished with imprisonment for a term of fifteen days to six months.” 34 Article 459 of the Criminal Code provides that “a person commits the offense of manslaughter if the person causes death due to lack of care or foresight, without intent to do injury.” Article 460 of the Criminal Code provides that “a person who involuntarily causes the death of another, provided that a harsher sentence is not established for such action, shall be punished with imprisonment from three months to two years and a fine of fifty to two hundred sucres.”