I INTRODUCTION TO THE CASE AND CAUSE OF THE ACTION 1. The case submitted to the Court. On August 11, 2020, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the Inter-American Commission” or “the Commission”) submitted the case of Baraona Bray against the Republic of Chile (hereinafter “the State” or “Chile”) to the jurisdiction of the Inter-American Court. According to the Commission, the case relates to the alleged international responsibility of the State for the violation of the right to freedom of expression, due to the imposition of subsequent liabilities and the inappropriate use of criminal law in matters of public interest. In May 2004, Carlos Baraona Bray (hereinafter “Mr. Baraona Bray” or “Mr. Baraona” or “the alleged victim”), a lawyer and environmental defender, gave a series of interviews and made statements that were reported by different media outlets, in which he claimed that a senator of the Republic had exerted pressure and influenced the authorities to carry out illegal logging of the alerce (Patagonian cypress) an ancient tree species in Chile. The senator filed a criminal complaint against Carlos Baraona Bray, who was convicted of the crime of “serious insults” through the media. He was sentenced to 300 days imprisonment, which was suspended, a fine, and the additional penalty of suspension from holding public positions or public office during the term of the sentence. Mr. Baraona then filed an appeal for annulment, however, the first instance ruling was upheld. The Commission concluded that the State is responsible for the violation of the rights to freedom of thought and expression and the principle of legality and judicial protection, enshrined in Articles 13, 9 and 25(1) of the Convention, in relation to Articles 1(1) and 2 of thereof, to the detriment of Carlos Baraona Bray. 2. Procedure before the Commission. The procedure before the Commission was as follows: a) Petition. On March 4, 2005, the Public Interest and Human Rights Clinic of the Diego Portales University filed an initial petition on behalf of Carlos Baraona Bray. b) Admissibility Report. On July 24, 2007, the Commission adopted Admissibility Report No. 50/07, in which it concluded that the petition was admissible. c) Merits Report. On May 4, 2019, the Commission adopted Merits Report No. 52/19 (hereinafter “Merits Report” or “Report 52/19”), in which it reached a series of conclusions and made several recommendations to the State. 3. Notification to the State. The Commission notified the Merits Report to the State on June 11, 2019, granting it two months to report on its compliance with the recommendations. The State requested four extensions, three of which were granted by the Commission for a period of three months each and one for a period of two months. On July 28, 2020, the State submitted a report on the measures it had adopted, indicating that recommendations 1, 3, 4 and 5 “were, essentially, fulfilled” and that the second recommendation is not applicable. 4. Submission of the case to the Court. On August 11, 2020, the Commission1 submitted to the Court’s jurisdiction all the facts and human rights violations described in the present case, considering “the need to obtain justice and reparation.” The Court notes with concern that more than 14 years have elapsed since the filing of the initial petition before the Commission and the submission of the case to the Court. The Commission appointed Commissioner Joel Hernández García, then Executive Secretary Paulo Abrão, and then Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Expression, Edison Lanza, as its delegates before the Court. It also appointed Marisol Blanchard Vera, Jorge Humberto Meza Flores and Cecilia La Hoz Barrera as legal advisers. 1 4