92. Now, the Court also notes that the duty to investigate ex oficio the death of Mr. Vera Vera as well as facts regarding the gunshot wound he received was an obligation established in the Ecuadorian criminal law at the time of the facts. In this respect, in the public hearing, the representatives noted that the investigation for the crime of battery was to be initiated, a crime codified in the Ecuadorian Criminal Code as a crime of criminal public prosecution.102 Moreover, the expert Manuel Ramiro Aguilar Torres (supra para. 20), based on Article 13 of the Ecuadorian Criminal Code in force at the time,103 stated that “[t]hose responsible for the death [of Mr. Vera Vera] either because of the firing of the weapon or because of the failure to adequately care for the patient, would have had to respond for manslaughter, deemed a felony or of willful intent, as appropriate; but [...] as the case was never judicialized to determine the identity of those responsible [...] and the true cause of his death, it is impossible to carry out an analysis about the way it applied, in particular, the criminal law in Ecuador.” 104 However, the expert also noted that the crime of battery was established in the Ecuadorian Criminal Code, and it could have been “investigated ex oficio” in accordance with Article 14 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in force at the time of the facts.105 In this regard, the expert referred extensively to the way in which, 102 In this regard, from Article 463 of the Penal Code, mentioned in the chapter on injuries, it is clear that "if a person [due to] an injury dies, [the person responsible will have] a penalty that is very similar to murder [and] therefore[, upon] the initiation of a criminal investigation for criminal injuries and despite [the] death of the person in the operating room, the criminal proceeding will continue until it is determined [why ...] the person died, [ie,] whether it was directly due to the gunshot or by medical malpractice, or [if it was due to] both actions and [,] therefore [,] there would be more responsibility add[ed]to the facts. " 103 This provision estbalished (case file of Merits, tomo II, folio 847): Art 13 .- The person who voluntary commits a criminal offense shall be liable for it, and will incur the penalty prescribed for the resulting infringement, although the harm caused may vary, or harms a person not intended to offend. In the case that there are preexisting causes of the punishable act, or of a simultaneous or supervening nature, independent of the will of the author, the following rules will be observed: If the event, which was not in the author's intention, is done as a result of the addition of one or more of these causes with a criminal offense, the defendant is liable for felony offense. If the event takes place as a result of one or more of these causes, without joining the punishable act, the author is not liable for the infringement but only for the act itself. 104 Expert statement of Mr. Manuel Ramiro Aguilar Torres (case file of Merits, tomo I, folio 588). 105 Expert statement of Mr. Manuel Ramiro Aguilar Torres (case file of Merits, tomo I, folios 581 a 582). Article 14 notes (case file of Merits, tomo II, folio 1047): 14 .- The criminal action is of a public nature. In general, it is carried out ex oficio, the private prosecution may be admitted; and only in the cases mentioned in Article 428 of this Code, shall it be exercised by private prosecution. " For its part, Article 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure established (case file of Merits, volume II, page 1118): Through private prosecution, criminal judges may only hear the following offenses: a) Rape of a minor perpetrated on a woman over sixteen and under eighteen; 37