23 added a paragraph to Article 316 of the Penal Code, making justification of a crime an aggravated crime, when its object is terrorism. Legislative Decree No. 921 established the inclusion in Title II of the Code on Execution of Sentences of a mechanism for reviewing life imprisonment sentences, when the person convicted has been in prison for 35 years. Finally, Law No. 27,837 of October 4, 2002, created the Special Commission for Review of the Penal Code and special criminal laws, to carry out a reform to correct some irrational aspects of the expansion of criminal law. Nevertheless, there are still some secondary elements of the anti-subversion legislation that merit specific review, particularly those relating to respect for the principle of proportionality. With regard to procedural matters, the judgment of the Constitutional Court declared that all the trials carried out before military courts were unconstitutional, as was the prohibition of the right to raise objections established in Article 13(h) of Decree Law No. 25,475, and the incommunicado of the detainee by order of the police, regulated by Article 12 (d) of Decree Law No. 25,475. Also, in the Constitutional Court’s interpretation, the provision under which the judge issues a detention order when the preliminary investigation order has been issued (Article 13(a) of Decree Law No. 25,475), should be understood in accordance with Article 135 of the Code of Criminal Procedure; in other words, this order should not be issued mechanically or obligatorily, but it must be ensured that the necessary requirements exist before proceeding with this precautionary measure. Moreover, as a result of this ruling, Legislative Decree No. 922 was issued, which regulated the system for annulling proceedings for treason and established procedural norms for trying crimes related to terrorism. Legislative Decree No. 926 regulated the mechanism for annulling terrorism trials that had been held in civilian courts, but with “faceless” prosecutors and judges, and where the prohibition to raise objections established in Article 13(h) of Decree Law No. 25,475 had been applied. Regarding the penitentiary system, Supreme Decree 003-2001-JUS of January 9, 2001, modified the special prison regimes. For visits by next of kin and friends, a face-to-face visit was permitted three days a week, for a period of up to eight hours. Meetings and communication with the defense lawyer were made face-to-face, private and confidential. Finally, as regards access to the exercise yard and “corridors,” it was established that prisoners would only be shut in between 9 p.m. and 6 a.m. Supreme Decree 006-2001-JUS of March 23, 2001, granted the prison administrators powers to limit and suspend some prisoners’ rights temporarily (up to 120 days, which could be extended), with adequate justification. The Constitutional Court established that Article 20 of Decree Law No. 25,475, concerning compliance with the punishment of continuous solitary confinement during the first year of detention and the prohibition to share