66 inadmissible.100On March 14, 1997, the private accuser filed an appeal against that ruling and the case records were forwarded to the Constitutional Court;101 134.38. on September 13, 1996, since the appeal filed against the Ruling of the First Criminal, Drug Trafficking and Environmental Crimes Court of First Instance had been found inadmissible, the Special Prosecutor in charge of the case filed an inhibitory “query on competence” before that same Court, for the proceeding to be heard pursuant to the Criminal Procedures Code in force.102 This Court received the writ and forwarded it to the First Criminal Trial Court of First Instance without issuing a decision or ruling on it;103 134.39. on September 19, 1996, the First Criminal Trial Court of First Instance, which had received the case file from the First Criminal, Drug Trafficking and Environmental Crimes Court of First Instance, when it analyzed the case records, filed a “query on competence” and therefore it forwarded the case records to the Supreme Court of Justice for it to decide.104 It also forwarded to the Supreme Court the “inhibitory query on competence” that had been filed by the Public Prosecutor in the case;105 134.40. on October 15, 1996, the Supreme Court ruled that the case should be processed according to the provisions of the Criminal Procedures Court that had been repealed, based on the fact that the order to commence trial had already been issued when the proceeding against the current defendants was left open.106 On November 19 and December 10, 1996, the private accuser and the Public Prosecutor’s Office, respectively, filed amparo remedies before the Constitutional Court against that ruling;107 100 Cf. writ issued by the Third Chamber of the Court of Appeals on March 14, 1997 (file with annexes to the brief answering the application and raising preliminary objections, leaf 6274). 101 Cf. writ issued by the Third Chamber of the Court of Appeals on March 14, 1997 (file with annexes to the brief answering the application and raising preliminary objections, leaf 6274). 102 Cf. query regarding competence before the First Criminal, Drug Trafficking and Environmental Crimes Court of First Instance on September 13, 1996 (file with annexes to the brief answering the application and raising preliminary objections, leaves 5517 to 5521). 103 Cf. ruling by the First Criminal, Drug Trafficking and Environmental Crimes Court of First Instance on September 17, 1996 (file with annexes to the brief answering the application and raising preliminary objections, leaf 5522). 104 Cf. query regarding competence by the First Criminal Trial Court of First Instance of September 19, (file with annexes to the brief answering the application and raising preliminary objections, leaves 5515 to 5516). 105 Cf. application by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights of June 19, 2001 (dossier on the merits and possible reparations, volume I, leaf 30). 106 Cf. ruling by the Supreme Court of Justice of October 15, 1996 (file with annexes to the brief answering the application and raising preliminary objections, leaves 5536 to 5538). 107 Cf. Judgment of the Constitutional Court of August 12, 1997 (file with annexes to the application, annex 33, leaves 676 to 697 and file with annexes to the brief answering the application and raising preliminary objections, leaves 6221 to 6242).