However, this assessment was not made in accordance with the provisions of Article 13 of the Convention, but evidently pursuant to the State’s domestic law. In this regard, it should be reiterated that the matter to be decided in the instant case is whether the domestic criminal judge, when hearing and deciding the matter, carried out a correct control of conformity with the Convention as regards the need for liability to ensure respect for the rights or reputations of others; in other words, not whether the criminal sanction under the State’s domestic law was applied correctly, but whether it was applied in accordance with the provisions of Article 13 of the Convention, and this did not happen. It should also be added that, in reality, the domestic judge did not even make a reasonable and sufficient weighing up between the complainants’ right to honor and reputation and the freedom of expression of Messrs. Mémoli, but merely considered that “freedom of the press […] cannot protect, [… ] those who cite it and, through their actions, harm the rights of third parties that also deserve protection,” 380 and gave prevalence to the former over the latter without examining the particular circumstances of the case or providing the reasoning for the option chosen. This runs counter to what, in short and applicable to this case, is meant by weighing up; namely; counterbalancing, offsetting 381 the rights established in the Convention that are at stake in the case concerned, so that they are all respected or exercised and not that the prevalence of one over the others means that the latter cannot be truly exercised and prove impracticable. 2. Criminal proceeding Now, the assessment of proportionality or weighing up mentioned above entails evaluating, among other matters, the circumstances in which the said statements that were found to be defamatory were expressed, and there is no record in the case file that this occurred. Indeed, it was not taken into account that the statements were made when, or at almost the same time as, the criminal proceeding filed by the authors against some members of the Management Committee of the Asociación Italiana de Socorros Mutuos, Cultural and Creativa “Porvenir de Italia” for the sale of burial niches in the Municipal Cemetery was being processed and decided, and their simultaneous request was made to the National Mutual Action Institute (INAM) to investigate supposed irregularities in the administration of the said Association. Thus, it is relevant that, while this criminal proceeding was underway from April 11 to June 13, 1990, the said statements were made between April 28, 1990 and May 10 of that year. It should also be noted that the recently mentioned request [to INAM] was made at the same time as the complaint filed on the first of the dates mentioned, which was decided on June 19, 1991. In addition, it is also significant that Carlos Mémoli was convicted for using the adjective “unscrupulous” in the document presented with the said request to the National Mutual Action Institute to conduct an administrative investigation; in other words, in the context of an administrative and, consequently, unpublished, proceeding. 380 Para. 83 of the Judgment. Cf. Diccionario de la Real Academia Española, 22nd edition (Ponderar: contrapesar, equilibrar). To weigh also means to determine the weight of something, and to examine carefully. 381 6