37 1999, in case file No. 115-95 in relation to Drs. Luis Alberto Paquilló and Miguel Ángel Melgarejo Encinas reached the same decision.66 73(35) As a result of the action for unconstitutionality filed by Marcelino Tieno Silva and more than 5,000 citizens, the Constitutional Court of Peru handed down a judgment on January 3, 2003, in which it ruled on the constitutionality of Decree Laws Nos. 25,475 (crime of terrorism), 25,659 (crime of treason), 25,708 and 25,880.67 73(36) The judgment of the Constitutional Court declared that article 2 of Decree Law No. 25,475, defining the crime of terrorism, was constitutional and that “it was a norm that does not fail to recognize the principle of legality, since it is one of those open criminal definitions that, owing to its imprecision, needs to be completed by the judge’s interpretation.” The judgment did not examine article 4 of this Decree Law, which defines the crime of collaboration with terrorism.68 73(37) As a result of the Constitutional Court’s judgment, the Executive issued Legislative Decrees Nos. 921, 922, 923, 924, 925, 926 and 927, to regulate the effects of this judgment, in relation to the annulment of the trials for crimes of terrorism held before unidentified judges and prosecutors.69 73(38) Article 2 of Legislative Decree No. 926 of February 19, 2003 established that the National Terrorism Chamber should, gradually within 60 days, annul de oficio, unless the prisoner waived this, the judgment and the oral proceeding and should declare, if applicable, the failure to substantiate the prosecutor’s charge in the criminal proceedings for the crimes of terrorism held in the criminal jurisdiction before unidentified judges or prosecutors. This period ended on April 19, 2003.70 New proceedings against María Teresa De La Cruz Flores 73(39) On June 20, 2003, the National Terrorism Chamber declared that all the previous proceedings were null and that the prosecutor’s charge in the 66 Cf. judgment delivered by the Special Criminal Chamber of the Lima Superior Court of Justice on November 21, 1996 (file of appendixes to the application, appendix 24, folios 207 to 254); and judgment delivered by the National Criminal Chamber for Terrorism Cases with jurisdiction at the national level on January 5, 1999 (file of appendixes to the application, appendix 29, folios 293 to 301). 67 Cf. judgment delivered by the Constitutional Court of Peru on January 3, 2003, to decide a popular action on constitutionality filed by Marcelino Tineo Silva and more than 5,000 citizens, file No. 010-2002-AI/TC Lima (file of appendixes to the application, appendix 30, folios 303 to 334). 68 Cf. judgment delivered by the Constitutional Court of Peru on January 3, 2003, to decide a popular action on constitutionality filed by Marcelino Tineo Silva and more than 5,000 citizens, file No. 010-2002-AI/TC Lima (file of appendixes to the application, appendix 30, folios 303 to 334). 69 Cf. judgment delivered by the Constitutional Court of Peru on January 3, 2003, to decide a popular action on constitutionality filed by Marcelino Tineo Silva and more than 5,000 citizens, file No. 010-2002-AI/TC Lima (file of appendixes to the application, appendix 30, folios 303 to 334); and Legislative Decrees Nos. 921, 922, 923, 924, 925, 926 and 927 (file of appendixes to the application, appendix 31, folios 336 to 346). 70 345). Cf. Legislative Decree No. 926 (file of appendixes to the application, appendix 31, folios 344 and