4 Tamayo in the military courts, pursuant to Decree-Law Nº 25.659 (Treason Law). b. On July 13, 1994, to the Commission's request of November 17, 1993, Peru responded that "file 41-93 was before the Fortieth [rectius: Forty-third] Criminal Court of Lima, against María Elena Loayza-Tamayo for the crime of terrorism, and that the file had been remitted to the President of the Superior Court of Lima ... for initiation of the oral proceedings." c. At the request of one of the petitioners, on September 16, 1994, a public hearing was held at the seat of the Commission. d. On September 26, 1994, the Commission approved Report Nº 20/94, in the final part of which it decided: 1. To declare that the Peruvian State is responsible for the violations, against María Elena Loayza, of the rights to Personal Liberty, Humane Treatment and Judicial Protection enshrined in Articles 7, 5 and 25 of the American Convention on Human Rights. 2. To recommend to the Peruvian State that, on the basis of the Commission's analysis of the events and of the law, it immediately release María Elena Loayza-Tamayo once it has received notification of this Report. 3. To recommend to the Peruvian State that it pay compensation to the plaintiff in the instant case, for the damage caused as a result of her unlawful deprivation of liberty from February 6, 1993, until such time as it orders her release. 4. To inform the Government of Peru that it is not at liberty to publish this Report. 5. To request that the Government of Peru inform the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, within thirty days, of any measures it has taken in the instant case, in accordance with the recommendations contained in paragraphs 2 and 3 above. e. On October 13, 1994, Report Nº 20/94 was transmitted to Peru by the Commission. The State replied that it was unable to concur with the Commission's analysis, findings and recommendations, and attached a brief prepared by a Task Force composed of government officials, indicating that: [d]omestic remedies have not been exhausted inasmuch as María Elena LoayzaTamayo's legal situation should be defined at the end of the judicial proceeding for the CRIME OF TERRORISM in the civil court system [and that] the recommendations made by the ICHR [Inter-American Commission] would involve deciding on a case still pending in the Peruvian justice administration. This is not possible, since under Peru's current Political Constitution, no authority may arrogate that power. It is for the Judicial Branch to rule on María Elena Loayza-Tamayo's legal situation through the proper criminal process. f. On January 12, 1995, the Commission, not having reached agreement with the Government, submitted this case for the consideration and decision of the Court. V 5. The application which the Commission filed with the Court on January 12, 1995, was notified to the State by the Secretariat of the Court (hereinafter "the Secretariat"), together with its attachments, on February 9, 1995, and was received by the latter on February 13. The Commission appointed Oscar Luján-Fappiano as its Delegate, and Edith MárquezRodríguez and Domingo E. Acevedo as its Attorneys. It also appointed the following persons to act as their assistants, representing the plaintiff as petitioners before the Commission: Juan Méndez, José Miguel Vivanco, Carolina Loayza, Viviana Krsticevic,