57 182. In the instant case, while the asset class in question –shares in a company- is the same as the asset class at issue in the Ivcher case, the damage being alleged is different. The petitioners in the instant case are not claiming that RCTV shareholders have been deprived of their shares in the company, or that they were at any time denied the use and enjoyment of their shares. Instead, they are alleging that, as a result of the decision not to renew RCTV’s concession –a decision already found to be unlawful in the preceding section of this report- the value of their shares has been “destroyed”. 183. The Commission has already concluded that the decision of the Venezuelan State not to renew RCTV's concession was arbitrary and discriminatory. The Commission also recognizes that the nonrenewal of the concession may have resulted in a loss of economic opportunities for RCTV and its shareholders. However, the Commission observes that although the petitioners submitted a report on the 257 "Economic effect of the closure of RCTV's free to air TV signal,” they do not cite this Report in their observations on the issue under examination, nor do they explain how this Report and its annexed documents serve to establish an effect on the value of RCTV’s shares as a direct result of this occurrence. C. Articles 8 (Right to a Fair Trial) and 25 (Right to Judicial Protection) of the American Convention, taken in conjunction with Article 1(1) thereof 184. Article 8(1) of the American Convention recognizes every person’s right to a hearing, before a competent court within a reasonable time: Every 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. 185. Article 25 of the American Convention protects every person’s right to a simple and prompt recourse to a competent court or tribunal for protection against acts that violate his fundament rights: 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. In the case sub examine, the petitioners allege a number of violations of the rights protected by articles 8 and 25 of the American Convention. These violations concern: 1) the government decisions not to renew RCTV’s concession; 2) the court challenge against the decision not to renew the concession; 3) the court proceeding that ordered that RCTV’s property assets be assigned to CONATEL; 4) the criminal complaints filed by RCTV; and 5) the court proceedings on the provisions measures ordered for RCTV employees. The Commission will now examine the arguments made in connection with each of these points. 257 On March 22, 2010, the petitioners submitted a report on the "Economic effect of the closure of RCTV's free-to-air TV signal,” Annex 71, Report on the economic effect of the closure of RCTV's free-to-air TV signal, Communication from the petitioners received on March 22, 2010, Annex. This report concludes that the "negative economic impact on RCTV” of the nonrenewal of the concession “is $1,042,508,988.”