-26names of the shareholders,33 and it considered that “information regarding third parties, such as commercial information, copyrights and trademarks, use of technology and, in general, the specific characteristics of the investment projects that foreign investors wished to develop were confidential, […] since this was data of a private nature, belonging to the investor, that could harm his legitimate business expectations if it were made public, and there was no legal source that permitted disclosure.”34 57(22) On November 13, 2002, the Ministry of Economy, Development and Reconstruction issued Decision Exenta No. 113, published in the official gazette on March 24, 2003. Article 1 of the Decision established that “acts, documents and background information whose disclosure and dissemination could affect the public interest shall be considered of a secret or confidential nature” and, in five subparagraphs, listed the situations envisaged by this Decision. Additionally, Article 2 establishes the circumstances in which acts, documents and background information would be of a secret or confidential nature considering that their disclosure and dissemination could affect the private interests of those concerned.35 Concerning the judicial proceedings 57(23) On July 27, 1998, “Marcel Claude Reyes, personally and in representation of the Terram Foundation, Sebastián Cox Urrejola, personally and in representation of the NGO FORJA, and Arturo Longton Guerrero, personally and as a Deputy of the Republic,” filed an application for protection [of constitutional rights] before the Santiago Court of Appeal.36 This recourse was based on the alleged violation by Chile of the right of the appellants to freedom of expression and access to State-held information, guaranteed by Article 19(12) of the Chilean Constitution, in relation to Article 5(2) thereof; Article 13(1) of the American Convention, and Article 19(2) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. They requested the Court of Appeal to order the Foreign Investment Committee to respond to the request for information and make the information available to the alleged victims within a reasonable time. In the text of this application for protection, the appellants did not refer to the meeting held with the Executive Vice President of the Foreign Investment Committee, or to the information that the latter had given them (supra para. 57(14) and 57(15)). 57(24) Article 20 of the Constitution of the Republic of Chile regulates the application for protection, which can be filed by an individual “on his own behalf, or by another person on his behalf” before the respective court of appeal when, “owing to arbitrary or illegal acts or omissions, he suffers denial of, interference with or threat to the legitimate exercise of the rights and guarantees established in specific subparagraphs of Article 19, 33 Cf. Testimony given by Eduardo Moyano Berríos before the Inter-American Court during the public hearing held on April 3, 2006; and report by Karen Poniachik, Executive Vice President of the Foreign Investment Committee, dated June 20, 2005 (file of appendixes to the brief answering the application and with observations on the requests and arguments brief, appendix 1, folio 2041). 34 Cf. Report by Karen Poniachik, Executive Vice President of the Foreign Investment Committee, dated June 20, 2005 (file of appendixes to the brief answering the application and with observations on the requests and arguments brief, appendix 1, folio 2042). Cf. Decision Exenta [Note: exempt from the control of the Comptroller General’s Office] No. 113 of the Ministry of Economy, Development and Reconstruction, published in the official gazette on March 24, 2003, (file of appendixes to the requests and arguments brief, appendix 6, folio 1270). 35 36 Cf. Application for protection filed by Marcel Claude Reyes, Sebastián Cox Urrejola and Arturo Longton Guerrero before the Santiago Court of Appeal on July 27, 1998 (file of appendixes to the application, appendix 3, folios 51 and 52).