4 answer the summons, arguing that he had the rank of a Minister of State and therefore enjoyed the same privileges as the Ministers; h) Judge Antonia Saquicuray of the Sixteenth Criminal Court of Lima initiated a formal investigation on April 19, 1995. Although this Judge tried to take statements from the alleged members of the “Colina Group” in prison, the Senior Military Command prevented this. The Supreme Military Justice Council issued a resolution establishing that the accused men and the Commander General of the Army and Head of the Joint Command, Nicolás de Bari Hermoza Ríos, were prevented from giving statements before any other judicial organ, because a case was being processed concurrently before military justice. i) As soon as Judge Saquicuray’s investigation began, the military courts filed a petition before the Supreme Court claiming jurisdiction in the case, alleging that it related to military officers on active service. However, before the Supreme Court could take a decision on this matter, the Congress of Peru adopted Amnesty Law No. 26479, which exonerated members of the army, police force and also civilians who had violated human rights or taken part in such violations from 1980 to 1995 from responsibility. The draft law was not publicly announced or discussed, but was adopted as soon as it was submitted, in the early hours of June 14, 1995. The President promulgated the law immediately and it entered into force on June 15, 1995. The effect of this law was to determine that the judicial investigations were definitively quashed and thus prevent the perpetrators of the massacre from being found criminally responsible; j) Law No. 26479 granted an amnesty to all members of the security forces and civilians who had been accused, investigated, prosecuted or convicted, or who were carrying out prison sentences, for human rights violations. The few convictions of members of the security forces for human rights violations were immediately annulled. Consequently, eight men who had been imprisoned for the case known as “La Cantuta”, some of whom were being prosecuted in the Barrios Altos case, were liberated; k) On June 16, 1995, pursuant to the Constitution of Peru, which indicates that judges have the obligation not to apply those laws that they consider contrary to the provisions of the Constitution, Judge Antonia Saquicuray decided that article 1 of Law No. 26479 was not applicable to the criminal cases pending in her court against the five members of the National Intelligence Service (SIN), since the amnesty violated constitutional guarantees and the international obligations that the American Convention imposed on Peru. A few hours after this decision had been issued, the Prosecutor General, Blanca Nélida Colán, stated in a press conference that Judge Saquicuray’s decision was an error; that the Barrios Altos case was closed; that the Amnesty Law had the status of a constitutional law; and that the prosecutors and judges who did not obey the law could be tried for malfeasance; l) The lawyers of those accused in the Barrios Altos case appealed Judge Saquicuray’s decision. The case was transferred to be heard by the Eleventh Criminal Chamber of the Lima Superior Court, whose three members would be responsible for revoking or confirming the decision. On June 27, 1995, Carlos Arturo Mansilla Gardella, Superior Prosecutor, defended all aspects of Judge