(...) when a detainee died before, during, or after interrogation, there was no intervention by the justice system and, in some cases, the judiciary was informed that the detainee had fled, which gave rise to a communique calling for his arrest, when in fact that citizen had already died. In some cases an arrest warrant was requested just to cover up the detainee's death.9 B. On the Prescription Law (Ley de Caducidad) 25. On April 16, 1985, the Parliamentary Investigative Commission of the Chamber of Representatives presented its "Final Report on the Situation of Missing Persons and the Facts that Led to Their Disappearance", in which it concluded that between 1973 and 1978 there had been 174 disappearances involving Joint Force and military personnel. The report stated that, as regards the missing adults, they are presumed to have died as a result of the treatment meted out to them and ordered the Chamber, without prejudice to the continuation of some inquiries, to remit the files on those cases to the Supreme Court of Justice and the Executive.10 26. Law 15.848 on the Expiry of the Punitive Claims of the State (Ley de Caducidad de la Pretensión Punitiva del Estado, or Expiry Law) was enacted on December 22, 1986, establishing the following: Article 1.- Let it be acknowledged that, consistent with the rationale underlying the situation derived from the agreement reached between political parties and the Armed Forces in August 1984 and with a view to completing the transition to full implementation of the constitutional order, exercise of the punitive claims of the State with respect to crimes committed up to March 1, 1985 by military and police personnel, purportedly for political reasons (equiparados y asimilados por móviles políticos) or in the course of duty or on orders from commanders operating during the de facto regime, has expired. Article 3.- For the purposes contemplated in the foregoing articles, the judge hearing the corresponding charges shall demand that the Executive report within no more than 30 days of receipt of the communication whether it considers that the facts under investigation are or are not included within the scope of Article 1 of the present law. If the Executive so notifies, the Judge shall order the case files to be closed and archived. If, on the other hand, the Executive does not reply or states that they are not included, inquiries shall continue. (…).11 27. Several international organizations have repeatedly underscored the incompatibility of that norm with the duty to investigate serious human rights violations. In 1992, the IACHR pointed out that "[T]he law in question has the intended effect of dismissing all criminal proceedings involving past human rights violations. With that, the law eliminates any judicial possibility of a serious and impartial investigation designed to establish the crimes denounced and to identify their authors, accomplices, and accessories after the fact."12 As a result, it concluded that Law 15.848 is incompatible with Article XVIII (Right to a fair trial) of the American Declaration on the Rights and Duties of Man and Articles 1, 8, and 25 of the American Convention on Human Rights.13 28. Likewise, on various occasions, at least since 1989, the Human Rights Committee has voiced its concern at the incompatibility of the norm with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which would, moreover, "have negative repercussion for the deterrence of future violations and would set an undesirable precedent both domestically and abroad."[unofficial translation]14 In 1993, the Committee mentioned that in adopting the Law, "the State contributed to the creation of an atmosphere of impunity that could undermine the democratic order and bring about other serious human rights violations." [unofficial translation]15 Appendix 4. Report by the Investigative Commission on the Ultimate Fate of 33 Citizens Detained between June 27, 1973 and March 1, 1985 Attached to the petitioner’s brief of August 15, 2007. 10 Final Report on the Situation of Missing Persons and Facts that Led to Their Disappearance by the Parliamentary Investigative Commission of the Chamber of Representatives. 11 Law 15,848 of December 22, 1986. 12 IACHR, Report 29/92, Cases 10.029, 10.036, 10.145, 10.305, 10.372, 10.373, 10.374, and 10.375. Merits, 35. 13 IACHR, Report 29/92, Cases 10.029, 10.036, 10.145, 10.305, 10.372, 10.373, 10.374, and 10.375. Merits, Uruguay, October 2, 1992, recommendation No. 1. 14Report of the Human Rights Committee, fortieth session, September 29, 1989, para. 275 15Human Rights Committee, Examination of reports submitted by States parties under Articles 40 of the Covenant, May 5, 1993, para 7. 9 5