4 16. The petitioner states that at that meeting, which lasted about three hours, Mr. Galindo Cárdenas explained that in 1993, when he was a practicing lawyer, four individuals arrived at his office in the city of Huánuco and asked him, amid threats and in his capacity as an attorney and a friend of the prosecutor in charge of the investigation, to try and secure the release of a fifth person who was being held in custody. The petitioner notes that Mr. Galindo did not assume the defense of the detainee in question and consequently, for reasons of security, he left the city of Huánuco for a prudent length of time and went to Lima where his family lived. He states that he also reported that prior to this incident, in the year 1991 or 1992, two individuals came to his office when he was in private legal practice and asked him to take up the defense of two of their relatives – Juan Santamaría Ramos and Fernando Salinas Solórzano – which he did when those individuals were subject to investigations and had charges made against them. He states that those persons paid him for his professional services and that Mr. Galindo issued the corresponding invoices after defending them in accordance with the law. He notes that those defense services were permissible under the Constitution of Peru. 17. The petitioner indicates that following that meeting, on the very same day, October 14, 1994, Mr. Galindo Cárdenas returned to his work as a judge at the Huánuco Criminal Chamber and attended a session of the plenary at which he explained his reasons for his late arrival. 18. The petitioner indicates that two days later, in the morning of Sunday, October 16, 1994, the head of the Counterterrorism Command (JECOTE) arrived at Mr. Galindo Cárdenas’s home to inform him that Col. Negrón wished to speak with him at the Yanac Army Barracks; he proceeded to that military facility, unaware that hours earlier, on a Lima television channel, President of the Republic Alberto Fujimori had accused the president of the Superior Court of Justice of Huánuco and the President of Huánuco University of committing acts of terrorism and had reported that both individuals had been detained in a police operation and had requested that Decree Law No. 25499, the Repentance Law, be applied to them. The petitioner indicates that clarification was later given that the complaint referred to Judge Galindo Cárdenas and not to the president of the Huánuco Superior Court of Justice. 19. The petitioner states that on October 16, 1994, Mr. Galindo Cárdenas was received very cordially at the Huánuco Military Barracks by Col. Negrón and another Army officer, who invited him into a room; there, once inside, the officer locked the door and placed the security chain on it with such speed that Mr. Galindo was unable to react. The petitioner reports that Mr. Galindo was kept in arbitrary and illegal detention at the Huánuco Military Barracks for 31 days. He states that Mr. Galindo’s arrest became public knowledge following the accusations that President Alberto Fujimori made on television on Sunday, October 16, 1994. 20. The petitioner says that it was not until October 18, 1994, that Mr. Galindo Cárdenas was allowed to talk to his wife and that, through her, he presented his resignation from his position as a judge on October 19, 1994, noting that his arrest was intended to undermine the reputation of the judiciary in Huánuco. 21. He indicates that while Mr. Galindo was being held at the military barracks, a police statement was taken from him by the JECOTE and the National Antiterrorism Directorate of Lima (DINCOTE–Lima), with the assistant provincial prosecutor in attendance; and that the statement was deliberately misplaced, since it contained the invoices for professional fees that the alleged victim had issued while working as an attorney in private practice. The petitioner states that according to the household search record and its annexes, prepared by police officers from DINCOTE–Lima with the provincial criminal prosecutor of Huánuco in attendance, both personal and professional documents relating to his work as an attorney were found in his home and seized; these included copies of professional fee invoices, including the receipts for payments received for the defense of Juan Santa María Ramos and Fernando Salinas Solórzano. The petitioner contends that if he had been a member of the Association of Democratic Lawyers, he would have received no payment for defending those individuals. Consequently, the petitioner contends that the defense of those persons was provided in accordance with law. 22. The petitioner claims that with the intent of presenting Mr. Galindo to public opinion as a subversive criminal who had invoked the Repentance Law and thereby to give credence to President Fujimori’s