alluded to the right to appeal, excluding formalisms that would prevent the review of conviction judgments, in order to satisfy the provisions of Article 8(2)(h) of the Convention. In this regard, for example, in the last of the abovementioned judgments, the Constitutional Chamber indicated that the right to appeal the judgment “is satisfied with the exceptional appeal in cassation, provided that it is not regulated, interpreted or applied with formalistic criteria – those that convert procedural rites into ends in themselves and not instruments for the better administration of justice. And also, provided that the court of cassation has the power – and exercises it -to annul or correct wrongful rejections of relevant evidence, restrictions on the right of defense and the right to offer and present evidence by the accused, and serious errors of fact or law in its assessment, as well as the lack of reasoning that prevents the appellant from challenging the facts and reasons stated in the judgment.” 366 261. However, as already noted, on July 2, 2004, this Court ruled in the case of Herrera Ulloa v. Costa Rica, establishing that “the writs of cassation filed to challenge the November 12, 1999, conviction did not satisfy the requirement of a liberal remedy that would permit the higher court to do a thorough analysis or examination of all the issues debated and analyzed in the lower court.” 367 Therefore, it declared that the State violated Article 8(2) (h) of the Convention in relation to Articles 1(1) and 2 of said treaty to the detriment of Mauricio Herrera Ulloa, 368 and ordered Costa Rica to “adapt its domestic legal system to conform to the provisions of Article 8(2) (h) of the Convention, in relation to Article 2 thereof.” 369 262. Approximately two years later, on June 6, 2006, the State of Costa Rica enacted Law 8503 “Law on the Opening of Criminal Cassation,” which, in principle, would enable a person convicted of a criminal offense to challenge factual, 370 evidentiary 371 and legal issues before the corresponding Court of Cassation 372 by filing an appeal for cassation, before the criminal Cf. Judgment 1739-1992 of July 1, 1992 of the Constitutional Chamber (evidence file, folio 42077). Cf. Case of Herrera Ulloa v. Costa Rica, supra, para. 167. 368 Cf. Case of Herrera Ulloa v. Costa Rica, supra, para. 168. 369 Cf. Case of Herrera Ulloa v. Costa Rica, supra, para. 198 and fifth operative paragraph. 370 Code of Criminal Procedure of Costa Rica of Costa Rica, Version 6 of 25, of 28/04/2006. Article 449 bis.Examination by the Court of Cassation. The Court of Cassation shall assess the merits of the claims invoked in the appeal and the grounds thereof, by examining the proceedings and the records of the hearing, so that it may assess the manner in which the trial judges assessed the evidence and based their decision. If the Court does not have sufficient records to make this assessment, it may reproduce in cassation the oral evidence of the trial that, in its opinion, is necessary to examine the merits of the claim, and will evaluate it in relation to the rest of the proceedings. Likewise, it may directly evaluate the evidence that has been introduced in writing to the trial. (Added by Article 3° of Law N° 8503 of April 28, 2006) 371 Code of Criminal Procedure of Costa Rica, Version 6 of 25, of 28/04/2006. Article 449.-Evidence in Cassation. The parties may offer evidence when the appeal is based on a procedural defect and the manner in which an act was carried out is disputed, as opposed to what is indicated in the proceedings, in the minutes or records of the debate, or in the judgment. Evidence proposed by or in favor of the accused is also admissible, including that related to the determination of the facts in dispute, when it is essential to support the claim being made and in the cases authorized in the review procedure. The Public Prosecutor's Office, the plaintiff and the civil plaintiff may offer essential evidence to resolve the merits of the claim, only when it has been previously rejected, has not been previously known or is related to new facts. The Court of Cassation shall reject oral evidence that is manifestly improper or unnecessary; but, if it deems it indispensable, it may order it even ex officio. When oral evidence has been received, those who have received it shall be part of the Court at the time of the final decision. (Reformed by Article 1° of Law N° 8503 of the 28 April 2006) 372 Code of Criminal Procedure of Costa Rica, Version 6 of 25, of 28/04/2006. Article 445. “Filing. The cassation appeal shall be filed before the court that issued the decision, within fifteen days of notification, by means of a well-founded document, in which the legal provisions that are considered to have been disregarded or erroneously applied shall be clearly cited and the claim shall be stated. Each reason and its grounds must be stated separately. No other plea may be raised outside this opportunity.” Article 446 “Hearing. Once the appeal has been filed, the court that issued the judgment shall give a hearing to the interested parties for a period of five days, during which time they must indicate the place or manner of receiving notifications in the appeal, and they may also file additional pleadings. If there is any adhesion, the trial court will grant a new hearing to the parties 366 367 82