47 Violation of Article 8(5) of the Convention Public trial 141. As regards the violation of Article 8(5) of the Convention, the Commission alleged that the trials of Mr. Luis Alberto Cantoral-Benavides, in both the military and regular courts, were carried out in the “non public” way prescribed in the antiterrorism laws (Articles 13.f) and 14 of Decree Law No. 25.475, and Article 5 of Decree Law No. 25.659) in force at the time of the facts, meaning that they consisted of “private hearings, in military facilities or penal institutions, before “faceless” judges, prosecutors and even lawyers, in a climate of intimidation and secrecy since no public was present at any time during the trial.” 142. The State presented no allegation regarding the alleged violation of Article 8(5) of the Convention. * 143. * * Article 8(5) of the Convention states that: Criminal proceedings shall be public, except insofar as may be necessary to protect the interests of justice. 144. The Court refers to its decision in this same judgment (supra para. 115) regarding the violation of Articles 8(1) and 8(5) of the Convention, in connection with military criminal trial of Luis Alberto Cantoral-Benavides. 145. The Court also observes that, according to Article 16 of Decree Law No. 25.475 (Crime of Terrorism), The trial shall be conducted in the respective penal institutions and under conditions that will prevent the judges, members of the Office of the Public Prosecutor and judicial assistants from being identified visually or audibly by the accused and the defense lawyers. 146. It is proven in the file that several hearings held as part of the proceedings in the regular courts were held in penal institutions (supra para. 63.p). 147. The above is sufficient to determine that the trial of Luis Alberto CantoralBenavides in the regular courts did not comply the requirement for a public trial established in Article 8(5) of the Convention. 148. The State did not provide information or arguments to show why the public nature of the trial should be restricted, given the “need to preserve the interest of justice,” as called for in Article 8(5) of the Convention. The Court considers that, given the particular characteristics of the Luis Alberto Cantoral-Benavides’ case, his trial could be public without affecting the application of justice. 149. Consequently, the Court concludes that the State violated, to the detriment of Luis Alberto Cantoral-Benavides, Article 8(5) of the Convention. XIII