Service,” it was possible to determine “with positive certainty that Jorge López and A.C. were indeed victims of the punishable act of torture.” 113 58. On January 17 and 21, 2020, the joint complainant and the Public Prosecution Service appealed the Criminal Court’s judgment. 114 On April 27, 2021, the Court of Criminal Appeals decided to “declare the Special Appeals admissible” and “annul the ruling of December 30, 2019.” 115 The Court of Appeal noted that “[the] lower court failed to adhere to the rules of sound criticism when evaluating evidence of a decisive nature [and] issued a flawed judgment that was liable to be annulled.” 116 The case was sent back to the court whose decision was appealed so that it could coordinate the transfer of the case to a new court so a new trial could be held.” 117 Currently the case is waiting for the members of a new trial court to be assigned to carry out the oral public trial. 118 As the parties also pointed out, one of the defendants has filed an action for the protection of constitutional rights with the Supreme Court of Justice challenging the decision of the Court of Appeal of April 27, 2021, annulling the judgment of December 30, 2019. 119 D. Relevant regulatory framework 59. At the time of the events, Article 12 of the Constitution of Paraguay established the following with respect to detention and arrest: No one shall be detained or arrested without a written order from a competent authority, except in the case of a person caught in flagrant commission of a crime that warrants imprisonment. All detained persons have the right: 1. To be informed, at the time of the event, of the reason, and of their right to remain silent and to be assisted by a defense attorney they trust. On arresting them, the authorities are obliged to show the written order ordering their detention; 2. To have their arrest communicated immediately to their relatives or to the persons they indicate; 3. To be able to communicate freely [with the outside world], unless, in exceptional cases, it is established in the arrest warrant issued by the competent judicial authority that they be held incommunicado. The incommunicado order shall not apply to their defense attorney, and shall in no case exceed the term prescribed by law; 4. To have an interpreter, if necessary; and, 113 Cf. Final Judgment No. 1 of the Collegiate Trial Court of the Judicial District of Asunción, Case 01-0102-01-2000-2606, “B.P., M.P., O.V., W.P., for infliction of bodily injury in the performance of public duties and others,” of December 30, 2019 (evidence file, folio 449). 114 Cf. Final Judgment No. 1 of the Collegiate Trial Court of the Judicial District of Asunción, Case 01-0102-01-2000-2606, “B.P., M.P., O.V., W.P., for infliction of bodily injury in the performance of public duties and others,” of December 30, 2019 (evidence file, folios 10481 to 10485). 115 Cf. Final Judgment No. 1 of the Collegiate Trial Court of the Judicial District of Asunción, Case 01-0102-01-2000-2606, “B.P., M.P., O.V., W.P., for infliction of bodily injury in the performance of public duties and others,” of December 30, 2019 (evidence file, folios 10516 and 10517). 116 Cf. Final Judgment No. 1 of the Collegiate Trial Court of the Judicial District of Asunción, Case 01-0102-01-2000-2606, “B.P., M.P., O.V., W.P., for infliction of bodily injury in the performance of public duties and others,” of December 30, 2019 (evidence file, folio 10515). 117 Cf. Final Judgment No. 1 of the Collegiate Trial Court of the Judicial District of Asunción, Case 01-0102-01-2000-2606, “B.P., M.P., O.V., W.P., for infliction of bodily injury in the performance of public duties and others,” of December 30, 2019 (evidence file, folios 10515). 118 Cf. Final oral arguments of the State of Paraguay in public hearing held during the 155th regular session (minute 3:14:00 to 3:14:40). 119 Cf. Motions, pleadings and evidence brief, para. 8 (merits file, folio 81). 18