96 g) the Guatemalan courts have allowed abusive use of the amparo remedy. While the law authorizes the amparo remedy against court rulings, the interpretation of said possibility by the courts in this case has enabled the parties to submit amparo remedies that have caused unjustifiable delays and permanent discontinuity of the proceeding. From February, 1994, to the date of the application, “eleven” amparo remedies have been filed by the defendants. Their obvious inadmissibility, which should have led the judges to reject them in limine to avoid undue delays in the proceeding, is demonstrated by the fact that said amparo remedies have been rejected by the courts. Furthermore, the 11 amparo remedies and their respective appeals were decided by the courts outside the terms set forth in the law, and this has entailed three years and four months of paralysis of the proceeding due to said remedies. This demonstrates that the intervening judges have been partly responsible for the use of the amparo remedy in this case as a fourth instance, becoming a covert appeal and nullifying its objective and aim of being a simple, rapid, and effective remedy; h) impunity that continues to exist in this case with respect to the accessories is because in Guatemala there are still many opportunities for the administration of justice to be subordinated to military interests, through what the Comisión para el Esclarecimiento Histórico de Guatemala has called “subterraneous mechanisms” of impunity. After acknowledging its responsibility for the murder of Myrna Mack Chang and the existence of a denial of justice in this case, the State has done nothing to correct the situation On the contrary, all it has done is to try to disregard said acknowledgment and to obstruct the judicial proceeding even more; and i) on October 3, 2002, the Third Criminal, Drug Trafficking and Environmental Crimes Trial Court issued a judgment of first instance in which Juan Valencia Osorio was found criminally responsible as perpetrator of the crime of murder against Myrna Mack Chang, and defendants Edgar Augusto Godoy Gaitán and Juan Guillermo Oliva Carrera were acquitted and cleared of all charges. On May 7, 2003, the Fourth Appellate Chamber acquitted Juan Valencia Osorio and upheld the terms of the first instance ruling that acquitted the other defendants. This judgment attempts to ensure impunity of such a grave violation, based on a reinterpretation of the facts that have been duly proven in the case file and that were assessed at the appropriate time by a judge of first instance in accordance with national legislation. In the instant case, the Commission deems that the judicial actions of the Guatemalan authorities have been arbitrary, and therefore the Court has the authority to rule on the matter. Pleadings of the representatives of the next of kin of the victim 160. The representatives of the next of kin of the victim asked the Court to find that the State had breached Articles 8 and 25 of the Convention and, in this regard, they stated that: a) in this case there was a systematic obstruction of the investigations by the agents of the State to cover up the responsibilities of the agents of the Presidential General Staff who were involved in the extra-legal execution of the victim;