conviction becomes final. 373 In particular, the Court emphasizes that transitory provision I of said law provided that: “Persons convicted of a criminal act prior to this law, who have been prevented from filing an appeal in cassation against the judgment due to the rules that governed its admissibility at that time, may file a motion for review of that judgment before the competent court, invoking, in each case, the grievance and the factual and legal aspects that could not be heard in cassation. 374 Thus, the Court understands that, through the grounds for review created by transitory provision I, a person convicted of a criminal offense could, in principle, obtain a comprehensive review of the judgment, including the factual and legal aspects. 263. Furthermore, Law 8837, enacted on June 9, 2010 and in force as of December 9, 2011, created an appeal remedy that would allow for a comprehensive examination of the conviction. 375 In addition, transitory provision III of said law established that “[i]n cases that are pending adjudication and in which the violation of Article 8(2)(h) of the American Convention has been previously alleged, the appellant shall be granted a period of two months to convert his petition for writ of cassation into a motion for appeal, which shall be filed before the former Courts of Cassation or the Third Chamber, as appropriate, which shall forward the case files to the new Courts of Appeal. Under penalty of admissibility, the grievance must be specifically stated.” In this way, individuals with pending appeals for cassation and review could have access to a comprehensive remedy. 264. In turn, Law 8837 limited the scope of the appeals for cassation 376 and review. 377 On this point, the Court notes that transitory provision III of this law establishes that “[i]n all cases that have a final judgment at the time of the entry into force of this law, and in which the violation of Article 8(2)(h) of the American Convention on Human Rights has been previously alleged, the convicted person shall have the right to file, once only, during the first six months, a review procedure that shall be heard according to the competencies established in this law, by the former Courts of Cassation or the Third Criminal Chamber.” From the foregoing, it follows on this matter, for a term of five days. Once these periods have expired, it will send the file to the corresponding Court of Cassation.” Article 447. - Procedure. The Court of Cassation may declare the appeal inadmissible if it considers that the decision is not subject to appeal, that the appeal has been filed extemporaneously or that the party does not have the right to appeal, in which case it shall so declare and return the proceedings to the court of origin. If the appeal is admissible, the Court shall substantiate it and rule on the merits, even if it considers that there are defects in its wording. If it considers that these absolutely prevent it from hearing the claim, it shall warn the party of its correction, in accordance with Article 15 of this Code, specifying the aspects that must be clarified and corrected. If the defects are not corrected, it shall decide the matter as appropriate. If the appeal is admissible and an oral hearing does not have to be convened, nor the receipt of evidence ordered, the Court shall issue a judgment. Otherwise, the judgment shall be rendered after the hearing and after the evidence has been received. (Reformed by Article 1° of Law N° 8503 of April 28, 2006)” 373 See Code of Criminal Procedure of Costa Rica, Version 6 of 25, of 28/04/2006. Article 148 “Final decision. Insofar as they are not appealed in due time, the judicial decisions shall be final and enforceable, without the need for any declaration whatsoever. Only a review of a final judgment may be made against it, in accordance with the provisions of this Code.” See, also Decision of the Third Chamber no. 2007-01177 of October 19, 2007 (evidence file, folio 1047). 374 Cf. Annexes to the Report of the State of Costa Rica to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (evidence file, folios 28473 and 28477). 375 Article 459. - “Admissibility of a motion to appeal. The motion to appeal judgment shall enable a comprehensive examination of the ruling, when the interested party claims to be in disagreement with the findings of fact, the introduction and evaluation of the evidence, the basis in law, or punishment established. The appeals court shall rule on any items that are expressly contested, but shall declare, ex officio on its own initiative, any absolute defects and infringements of due process that may be found in the judgment of conviction.” 376 Article 167- (Allows the cassation appeal to proceed against judgments issued by the appellate courts), and Article 468 (allows the cassation appeal to be based only on two grounds: a) When the existence of contradictory precedents issued by the appellate courts is alleged, or of the latter with precedents of the Criminal Cassation Chamber, and b) When the judgment does not observe or erroneously applies a substantive or procedural legal precept. The provisions of Article 178 of the Code, referring to absolute defects, are excepted). 377 In particular, Law 8837 eliminated subparagraph g) of Article 408 in force at the time, which allowed the filing of an appeal for review when the judgment had not been issued through due process or opportunity for defense. 83