III. POSITIONS OF THE PARTIES A. The petitioners 12. The petitioners claim to have been employees of the Ministry of the Economy and Finance who were dismissed without the guarantees of legal due process, during the reorganization of government institutions in the 1990s. In the petition they allege that in the wake of the auto-coup of former president Alberto Fujimori, various abuses were committed against government employees, such as the decommissioning of the National Civil Service Tribunal (which was the administrative venue to which state servants could turn) and of the National Public Administration Institute, and the take-over of Office of the Comptroller General of the Republic. 13. The petitioners contend that they were initially under the labor system of Legislative Decree No. 275, which Article 276 provides that “no public employee shall be dismissed or removed except for the causes that the law stipulates and in accordance with the established procedure”. The petitioners allege that despite that provision, in December 1991 a governmental reorganization was instituted by Decree-Law No. 26093; pursuant to that Decree-Law, Ministerial Resolution No. 12397-EF of July 3, 1997, approved an evaluation system whereby staff of the Ministry of the Economy and Finance who did not pass the exam could be declared redundant staffing. The petitioners allege that they underwent numerous evaluations between 1991 and 1997, when it was decided that they should be entered into a training program. The petitioners allege that they participated in the program, underwent academic evaluation, and took a test at the end of the course which, the petitioners contend, they passed. 14. According to the petitioners’ allegations, subsequent to this process, Vice Ministerial Resolution 037-97-EF/13, dated December 22, 1997, ordered that the evaluation of the Ministry’s staff was to include an academic and psychological evaluation. The petitioners allege that in their case, this resolution was applied retroactively, since they had already completed their evaluation process. The petitioners claim that their technical psychological tests were administered on December 26, 1997, and that they were not informed of the results. 15. The petitioners also allege that in the days that followed, they received telephone calls from Ministry authorities to pressure them into tendering letters of resignation. They claim that they reported these incidents to the Minister of Economy and Finance and to the Ombudsman’s Office. 16. The petitioners allege further that on December 31, 1997, by circular 065-97-EF/43.40, they were told that they had not passed their academic and psychological evaluations. The petitioners allege that these grades were tampered with and that the final grade was arrived at by assigning double weight to the psychological evaluation, a fact of which the petitioners were unaware. 17. With that background information, the petitioners contend that by Ministerial Resolution 234-97-EF/10, dated December 31, 1997, they were dismissed on the grounds that they were redundant staffing, which they were notified of on January 8, 1998. The termination had allegedly taken effect on January 2, 1998, prior to the date on which the petitioners were notified of the decision. They indicate further that 3