principle of indubio pro reo; consequently, the decision of the Superior Chamber is in accordance with the law […]47 59. In report No. 245-2009-JUS/PPES del 3 of August 3, 2009, the State transmitted to the IACHR the report of the Procuraduría Pública of the Judicial Branch, which stated as follows: The case of Walter Munárriz Escobar was subject to both a preliminary and a judicial investigation; ultimately, in keeping with the principle of independence in exercising jurisdictional function, the latter acquitted the alleged authors of the crime of forced disappearance, in a judicial process under the protection of the constitutional principle of cosa juzgada, with the Supreme Court ruling at the highest jurisdictional level against nullity of the acquittal judgment.48 60. From the information provided by the parties, the Commission notes that, after the decision of October 20, 2004 of the Permanent Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice, there were no further investigations into the disappearance of Walter Munárriz Escobar. Nor were any steps taken to determine his whereabouts or to find his mortal remains. And this, despite the fact that in the judgment that remains firm, namely the judgment of May 25, 2004, the Joint Chamber of the Superior Court of Justice ruled that the disappearance of Walter Munárriz Escobar was proven and ordered that investigations continue. 2. Disciplinary process 61. In Report No. 133-2007-JUS/CNDH-SE/CESAPI, of September 12, 2007, the State sent to the Commission documentation regarding administrative-disciplinary investigations related to the alleged disappearance of Walter Munárriz Escobar by personnel of the Angaraes PNP Provincial Headquarters. 62. The State submitted Report No. 014-99-FPAH-SRPMP-HVCA/INSP.C, of April 8, 1999, in which it indicated that on March 24, 1999, the Provincial Prosecutor of Lircay-Angaraes, Silvia Montero Meléndez, sent letter No. 125-99-MP-FPMANGARAES to the PNP Colonel of the Huancavelica Subregion, in which she announced the disappearance of Walter Munárriz Escobar and the presumed involvement of state agents. In this letter, the Prosecutor stated that “this will surely be clarified with the investigations conducted by this office […], as these versions are completely false, since we are experiencing a period of peace and we do not have human rights violations.”49 Thus the Prosecutor asked the PNP Colonel of the Huancavelica Subregion, since it is his job to clarify crimes reported, to assist in the investigations to find Walter Munárriz Escobar and “especially to clear the name of the institutions we represent and ensure that they remain a source of pride.”50 63. Among the steps taken, referred to in Report 014-99-FPAH-SRPMP-HVCA/INSP.C, it is noted that the Inspector-Commander of the National Police of Peru: a) Interviewed the police officers involved in the events; b) Obtained a copy of the Staff Duty Roll of the Angaraes Provincial Headquarters for March 19 and 20, 1999, c) Requested a copy of the background of three officers, and 47 Annex 26. Copy of the decision of the Permanent Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice of October 20, 2004. Annex to the State’s Memorandum No. 7-5-M/066 of February 9, 2006. 48 Annex 27. Official Letter No. 2339-09-CE-PJ/PP of September 28, 2009, sent as an Annex to the State’s memorandum No. 75-M/690 of October 20, 2009. 49 Annex 28. Copy of Report 014-99-FPAH-SRPMP-HVCA/INSP.C, sent as an annex to the State’s memorandum No. 7-5-M/409 of September 17, 2007. 50 Annex 28. Copy of Report 014-99-FPAH-SRPMP-HVCA/INSP.C, sent as an annex to the State’s memorandum No. 7-5-M/409 of September 17, 2007. 13