The 1983 CCP, containing the above-mentioned Article 177, which was applied to the facts of the case, was expressly annulled in 2000. 18 38. On October 1, 1993, the superintendent notified the 11th Criminal Court in Guayas of the murder trial of Mr. Carranza and one other person. On the 28th of the same month, the 11th Criminal Court of Guayas (hereinafter “11th Court”) took over the criminal trial. It also upheld the detention orders issued and requested that the National Police take steps to capture the individuals. That decision stated that the criteria set out in Article 177 of the CCP were met, so it was appropriate to uphold the preventive detention orders issued by the superintendent. 39. In November 1994, Mr. Carranza was detained by Ecuador's Rural Police. The Merits Report indicated that Mr. Carranza stated in the initial petition sent to the Commission that he was detained "without having been caught committing a crime” and without the police officials presenting a "detention order.” The Commission also noted that Mr. Carranza claimed he had been held incommunicado for more than 24 hours, without the assistance of a lawyer, and interrogated using “psychological pressure.” The representative described the facts in the same way. When the State recounted the facts of the case in its response, it did not refer to the detention of Mr. Carranza or the other statements recently articulated. B) Continuation of the criminal trial after the detention 40. On December 6, 1994, Mr. Carranza presented a brief before the 11th Court. In it, he named his defense lawyer 19 and rejected the accusation against him, stating that it “[was] not connected to the reality of the facts, [...] since [he] never [shot] the gun.” 41. On December 7, 1994, Mr. Carranza asked the 11th Court to receive his statement and also three testimonies. 42. On February 23, 1995, the 11th Court received Mr. Carranza’s requests and arranged for his transfer to the Men’s Social Rehabilitation Center in Guayaquil in order to receive the investigatory testimony. 43. On August 23, 1995, two written testimonies were received, and on the 25th of the same month, Mr. Carranza submitted his investigatory testimony. He maintained that on August 15, he was in the canton of Durán, that he does not know the person who died, and that he “[had] not committed any crime.” 44. On September 11, 1995, Mr. Carranza presented a brief to the 11th Court requesting his release. He stated that he had been imprisoned for the last “10 months[,...] blamed for something [he] had not done.” There is no record of a response to this request. 18 In the same vein, expert witness Fonte Carvalho explained, referring to preventive detention, that there was a “legal framework” between 1983 and 2000; that then “[b]etween January 13, 2000, and February 10, 2014, the Code of Criminal Procedure was in force;” and that on the last date indicated, “the Comprehensive Organic Criminal Code entered into force.” 19 The State noted that later, on August 28, 1998, Mr. Carranza named his defense lawyer again. 11