of Constitutional and Social Law declared that there was no nullity and that it agreed with the decisions issued by the lower courts; and that on November 14, 1996 the Specialized Court for Civil Matters of Lima issued a resolution requiring the respondent to comply within a period of three days with the order of the “Supreme Court.” 14. Among the actions attempted and resolutions from governmental authorities ordering that the decision be enforced, the petitioners mention the following: - In 1993 they filed a complaint with the Oversight Committee of the Democratic Constituent Congress, which agreed to send an official letter to the President of ECASA ordering him to proceed to pay the workers’ fringe benefits in accordance with what had been ordered in the Supreme Court’s final decision of February 16, 1993. - On November 10, 1995, the Superior Court of Justice issued a decision responding to the ECASA Privatization Committee and the Government Prosecutors who sought to ignore the legal status and existence of the union; the Court expressed its views in the following terms “it is obvious that what the summoned ECASA is seeking by liquidating is to evade the union and not satisfy the rights of the workers that the union brings together, in that it is has full knowledge that the principal action has been won by the petitioners under a final decision of the Supreme Court, the processing of which is at the stage when the decision is to be executed. This resolution was confirmed by the Supreme Court of the Republic on February 16, 1996. - The petitioners went to the ILO and received a response indicating that the ILO had intervened with the Government of Peru and would keep them informed of the response. - In 1997 SUTECASA filed a complaint with the Oversight Committee of the Congress, the Chair of which set up a sub-committee that recommended that a criminal complaint be filed against the Special Committee of ECASA in liquidation, as well as the intervention of the Office of the Comptroller General of the Republic. - The Special Committee was created under Law 27452 and the Multisectoral Committee was created by Executive Decree 027-2001TR; these committees ruled in their final reports that based on the decision in favor of SUTECASA, the petitioners were entitled to payment of fringe benefits given that Executive Decrees 057-TR and 107-PMC had been applied to them by ignoring the Collective Agreement and Salary Schedule signed by SUTECASA and ECASA, the result of which was that the payment calculations were less than what the petitioners were entitled to, in addition to the violation of the constitutional standard establishing that obligations to workers take precedence. - They reported the situation to the Constitution Committee of the Congress and the Labor Committee; on August 6, 2001 the first committee sent an official letter to the Minister of Economy and Finance, indicating that since the debts were recognized by the Constitutional Court, they should be honored with the greatest urgency. This was reiterated on March 20, 2002 and June 4, 2002. The

Select target paragraph3