33 medication; also that she had been “indoctrinated with the Party’s ideological and doctrinal beliefs” and “occupied a high rank [in this] organization.”44 73(15) The testimonies of the “arrepentida” code No. A2230000001, of Jacqueline Aroni Apcho and of Elisa Mabel Mantilla Moreno, also provided DINCOTE with grounds for establishing that the person identified by the alias “Elíana” was María Teresa De La Cruz Flores.45 73(16) The “arrepentida” code No. A2230000001, Jacqueline Aroni Apcho and Elisa Mabel Mantilla Moreno testified on different occasions during the preparation of the trial against María Teresa De La Cruz Flores. Their testimonies are inconsistent.46 73(17) During the trial, under the legislation in force, Mrs. De La Cruz Flores was not able to question “arrepentida” code No. A2230000001, whose testimony was key to the formulation of the charge against her. Mrs. De La Cruz Flores was not informed about the police depositions and was unable to comment on them.47 73(18) The trial against Mrs. De La Cruz Flores resulting from her second detention was held before a “faceless” civilian court.48 73(19) On September 16, 1995, the Titular Provincial Prosecutor of the Lima Fourteenth Provincial Criminal Prosecutor’s office formulated an expanded complaint for the “crime of terrorism (acts of collaboration)” harmful to the State against María Teresa De La Cruz and others.49 44 Cf. expanded police deposition No. 106-DIVICOTE IV-DINCOTE of October 9, 1995 (file of appendixes to the final written arguments, appendix 1 to the final written arguments of the InterAmerican Commission on Human Rights, folios 1198 to 1218). 45 Cf. expanded police deposition No. 106-DIVICOTE IV-DINCOTE of October 9, 1995 (file of appendixes to the final written arguments, appendix 1 to the final written arguments of the InterAmerican Commission on Human Rights, folios 1198 to 1218). 46 Cf. expanded police deposition No. 106-DIVICOTE IV-DINCOTE of October 9, 1995 (file of appendixes to the final written arguments, appendix 1 to the final written arguments of the InterAmerican Commission on Human Rights, folios 1198 to 1218); testimony of Jacqueline Aroni Apcho given on November 17 and 20, 1995 (file of appendixes to the brief with requests and arguments, appendix 6, folios 414 to 423); expansion of the testimony of the prisoner Code No. A2230000001 who took advantage of the Repentance Act, made on August 17, 1993 (file of appendixes to the brief with requests and arguments, appendix 7, folios 426 to 440); statement made by Elisa Mabel Mantilla Moreno on September 7, 1995 (file of appendixes to the brief with requests and arguments, folios 452 to 477); sworn statement made by Elisa Mabel Mantilla Moreno on September 21, 2002 (file of appendixes to the brief with requests and arguments, appendix 10, folio 479); and statement made by Jacqueline Aroni Apcho on September 19, 1995 (file of appendixes to the brief with requests and arguments, appendix 11, folios 481 to 490). 47 Cf. Decree Law No. 25,475 (file with the State’s comments on the affidavits, appendix 10 of the brief with comments on the expert report made before notary public by Mario Pablo Rodríguez Hurtado, folios 975 to 980). 48 Cf. Decree Law No. 25,475 (file with the State’s comments on the affidavits, appendix 10 of the brief with comments on the expert report made before notary public by Mario Pablo Rodríguez Hurtado, folios 975 to 980). 49 Cf. expanded complaint No. 113-95 formulated by the Titular Provincial Prosecutor of the Fourteenth Criminal Prosecutor’s Office of Lima for terrorism cases on September 16, 1995 (file of appendixes to the application, appendix 15, folios 124 to 125).