a) Acquittal issued by the Angol Oral Criminal Trial Court on April 14, 2003116 112. On April 14, 2003, the Angol Oral Criminal Trial Court117 delivered an acquittal with regard to three of the accused in relation to all the charges. The court declared that, based on the evidence, it could conclude that the criminal acts had occurred and that they had a terrorist objective, indicating, inter alia, that: […] the action that resulted in these wrongful acts reveals that the form, methods and strategies used had the criminal purpose of causing a generalized state of fear in the region; […] they relate to a serious dispute between part of the Mapuche ethnic group and the rest of the population [and these wrongful acts] are inserted in a process of recovery of lands of the Mapuche people […] that has been carried out by acts of violence, without respecting the legal and institutional order, resorting to previously planned acts of violence, coordinated and prepared by radicalized groups that seek to create a climate of insecurity, instability and fear in different sectors of Regions XIII and IX. 113. The court then examined the possible participation of Messrs. Pichún Paillalao and Norín Catrimán and of Ms. Troncoso Robles in the facts and concluded that the evidence “did not meet the necessary evidentiary standards in relation to its degree of quality, certainty and sufficiency, to affect the constitutional and legal presumption of innocence that protects the accused, a circumstance that allows these judges to reach the peremptory conviction that the participation of the aforementioned Pichún, Troncoso and Norín as perpetrators of the offenses of which they were accused has not been proved, in accordance with […] the charges brought against them.” b) The appeal for annulment before the Supreme Court of Justice 114. On April 23 and 24, 2003, the complainants and the assistant prosecutor of the Public Prosecution Service of Traiguén, respectively, filed appeals for annulment against the acquittal decided by the Angol Oral Criminal Trial Court (supra paras. 112 and 113). Among other matters, they alleged the failure to weigh the evidence proving the participation of the accused in the events, and the existence of contradictions and inconsistencies in the appealed judgment. In addition, they argued that “the final judgment rejected or concluded that the testimony of anonymous witness No. 1 was ‘entirely unreliable,’ without indicating its reason or reasons for reaching this conclusion.” In the three appeals the Supreme Court was asked to annul the oral trial and the acquittal and to order that a new oral trial be held. By a decision of June 3, 2003, the appeals were declared admissible and they were examined during a public hearing on June 11 and 12, 2003.118 115. On July 2, judgment, and, by for absolute nullity of the judgment of of a new trial. The had not complied 116 2003, the Second Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice delivered a majority vote, admitted the appeals for annulment based on the grounds defined in article 374(e) of the Criminal Procedural Code, decreed the nullity April 14, 2003 (supra paras. 112 and 113), and established the admissibility Chamber considered that the decision of the Angol Oral Criminal Trial Court “even remotely” with the requirements of analyzing the evidence and Angol is a city and commune, capital of the province of Malleco in the Region of Araucanía, Chile. 117 Cf. Judgment delivered by the Angol Oral Criminal Trial Court on April 14, 2003, tenth and eleventh consideranda and first operative paragraph (file of annexes to the Merits Report 176/10, annex 16, folios 569, 571 and 574). 118 Cf. Appeal for annulment filed on April 23, 2003, by the complainant Juan Agustín Figueroa Elgueta against the acquittal issued on April 14, 2003, by the Angol Oral Criminal Trial Court; Appeal for annulment filed on April 24, 2003, by the Office of the Regional Prefect and the Office of the Provincial Governor of Malleco against the acquittal issued on April 14, 2003, by the Angol Oral Criminal Trial Court; Appeal for annulment filed on April 24, 2003, by the assistant prosecutor of the Public Prosecution Service of Traiguén against the acquittal issued on April 14, 2003, by the Angol Oral Criminal Trial Court (file of helpful evidence presented by the State, folios 445 to 515), and Judgment delivered on July 2, 2003, by the Second Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice (file of annexes to the Merits Report 176/10, annex 17, folios 575 to 606). 40