32 evidence: (i) the judicial statement given by Francisco Amaya Villalta, and (ii) the positive identification made by Mr. Rodríguez Marroquín in the identity parade and the pre-trial hearing. 132. irregularities. The established facts indicate that both these pieces of evidence contained significant 133. Regarding the judicial statement made by Francisco Amaya Villalta during the negotiation of his plea bargain, the Commission notes that this document is a verbatim copy of his extrajudicial statement of October 9, 2000. The only difference is the inclusion of José Agapito Ruano Torres’s name alongside the references to Chopo. The Commission believes that the decision to allow a plea bargain, a mechanism provided for in the criminal law of El Salvador,174 is a matter for the sole competence of the domestic judicial authorities. However, the Commission notes that the legislation establishes a series of requirements that must be met for plea bargains to proceed in a way that is compatible with the state’s duty of properly clearing up crimes. This is of particular relevance since the result thereof can be that persons who provide information about crimes in which they participated are not prosecuted. 134. The Commission notes that the decisions of the Justice of the Peace of Tonacatepeque of October 12 and 16, 2000, giving authorization for a statement to be taken from Mr. Amaya Villalta and allowing the plea bargain to proceed, respectively, were not grounded in such a way as to indicate the facts, reasons, and requirements that had been met and that allowed Mr. Amaya Villalta to benefit from such an arrangement. 135. The absence of information on the guarantees that applied to this formality is particularly problematical since, throughout the proceedings, the statement in question was used as one of the two key pieces of evidence for the trial and conviction. Mr. Ruano Torres asked to be able in some way to confront Mr. Amaya Villalta, for him to explain the reason for his inclusion in the extrajudicial statement instead of the alias Chopo. However, Mr. Ruano Torres was denied that possibility. 136. It should be noted that in the case of Chaparro Álvarez and Lapo Íñiguez v. Ecuador, the Court found that the State had violated the right of defense in that the victims’ lawyers were unable to attend one essential formality in the proceedings brought against the victims for the crime of drug 174 Article 20 of the Salvadoran Code of Criminal Procedure: In public actions, the prosecutor may petition the judge to omit the criminal prosecution of one or more of the charges, with respect to one or more of the accused, or to constrain himself to one or more of the possible juridical interpretations, in the following cases: (1) When the act is such that, by reason of its insignificance, the minimal contribution of the participant, or his minimal guilt, the public interest is not affected. (2) When the accused did everything within his power to prevent the commission of the act or made a decisive contribution to casting light on the participation of other defendants in the same act or another more serious act. (3) When the accused has suffered, as a direct consequence of the act, serious or irreparable physical or mental harm that inhibits him from pursuing his regular occupation or when, in the case of a culpable crime, he has suffered insurmountable moral harm. (4) When the punishment applicable to the act or the legal interpretation that is not to be prosecuted is unimportant compared to a sanction that has already been imposed, to the sanction applicable to the remaining actions or interpretations, or to the sanction that would be imposed in proceedings pursued abroad. If the judge deems the activation of any of these criteria to be applicable, or in cases covered by the first subparagraph of this article and activation has been requested by the complainant, the opinion of the prosecutor shall be sought, which shall be delivered within no more than the following three days. The judge shall not enable a plea bargain without the prosecutor’s consent.