2 by seven votes to one, 8. [held] that the State violated Article 8(5) of the American Convention on Human Rights. Judge Vidal Ramirez dissenting. unanimously, 9. [held] that the State violated Articles 25 and 7(6) of the American Convention on Human Rights. by seven votes to one, 10. Rights. [held] that the State violated Article 5 of the American Convention on Human Judge Vidal Ramirez dissenting. unanimously, 11. [held] that the State violated Articles 1(1) and 2 of the American Convention on Human Rights. unanimously, 12. [held] that the violation of Article 51(2) of the American Convention on Human Rights alleged in the instant case need not be examined. unanimously, 13. [held] that the proceedings conducted against Mr. Jaime Francisco Sebastián Castillo Petruzzi, Mrs. María Concepción Pincheira Sáez, Mr. Lautaro Enrique Mellado Saavedra and Mr. Alejandro Luis Astorga Valdés are invalid, as they were incompatible with the American Convention on Human Rights, and so orders that the persons in question be guaranteed a new trial in which the guarantees of due process of law are ensured. unanimously, 14. order[ed] the State to adopt the appropriate measures to amend those laws that this judgment has declared to be in violation of the American Convention on Human Rights and to ensure the enjoyment and exercise of the rights recognized in the American Convention on Human Rights to all persons subject to its jurisdiction, without exception. unanimously, 15. order[ed] the State to pay a sum totaling US$10,000 (ten thousand United States dollars), or its equivalent in Peruvian national currency, to those next of kin of Mr. Jaime Francisco Sebastián Castillo Petruzzi, Mrs. María Concepción Pincheira Sáez, Mr. Lautaro Enrique Mellado Saavedra and Mr. Alejandro Luis Astorga Valdés, who show proof of having incurred costs and expenses by reason of the instant case. The procedure followed shall be the one described in paragraph 224 of [...] Judgment.. unanimously, 16. decid[ed] to oversee compliance with the orders given in this Judgment. 2. The writing of the State of Peru (hereinafter “the State” or “Peru”) of June 15, 1999, to which it attached the June 11, 1999 Order of the Plenary Court of the Supreme Council of Military Justice, which held that the May 30, 1999 Judgment of