Bedregal. 58 On August 23, 2006, an order was issued requesting that "its request be brought into line with the principle of relevance with respect to the crimes being tried." 59 On August 28, 2006, the Flores Bedregal family reiterated the request. 60 The response was limited to making mention to the "prior opposing notice from the Prosecution's View." 61 On September 23, 2006, the Flores Bedregal family reiterated its request for access to information. 62 52. On December 12, 2007, the Second Criminal Court, through Resolution No. 129/2007 (hereinafter Resolution No. 129/2007) delivered a conviction in the ordinary criminal proceedings against several defendants. It was deemed to have been proven that Franz Pizarro Solano, Felipe Froilán Molina, and José Luis Ormachea España actively participated in the armed uprising of July 17, 1980, and that although "it has not been possible to determine [...] the direct perpetrator of the death of the leaders, [...] it is no less evident that the murder of Marcelo Quiroga Santa Cruz, Juan Carlos Flores Bedregal and Gualberto Vega Yapura is proven [..., as] the three defendants participated in the seizure of the C.O.B, allowing for the death of the leaders, and participated, both directly and indirectly, in the torture of those apprehended, and having failed to cooperate in clarifying the facts and determining those truly responsible for the death of the leaders and the location of their bodies, the conduct of the three defendants is fully consistent with the crimes for which they were accused." They were sentenced to a 30-year prison sentence without the right to pardon for crimes of armed uprising against the security and sovereignty of the State, terrorism and cover-up, and as accomplices to murder. 63 53. With regard to the removal of the alleged bodies of Marcelo Quiroga and Juan Carlos Flores Bedregal, it was decided to acquit some of the defendants 64 for insufficient evidence to declare them as guilty for the crimes of false testimony and cover-up. However, as to Rogelio Gómez Espinoza, Joaquín Quisbert Quiroga, Raúl Solano Medina, Adolfo Ustarez Ferreira, José Gregorio Loza Balza, René Javier Hinojoza Valdéz, and José Faustino Rico Toro, the judicial body determined that they were guilty of the aforementioned crimes, on the basis that, despite having proven that they participated in the events of the coup d'état, they "refused to provide further information about the other participants in the events, about the direct victimizers [(sic)] and about the whereabouts of the remains of the deceased leaders," since in the statements they gave, they "covered up information" and in "the statements they gave, they remained silent about the truth they fully or partially know." In addition, it indicated that Rogelio Gómez Espinoza and Joaquín Quisbert Quiroga, implicated in the 58 Cfr. Brief of lawyer Eulogia Pantoja Vacaflor on behalf of the Flores Bedregal family, dated August 22, 2006, presented on the same date (case file evidence, p. 8491). Previously, on April 27, 1999, the Third Magistrate's Court in the criminal proceeding "Public Prosecutor v. Franz Pizarro Solano et al." requested the Archives of Department II of the Army Joint Chiefs of Staff from the Armed Forces. Cfr. brief of April 27, 1999 of the Third Magistrate's Court (case file evidence, p. 8493). In response to said communication, on June 9, 1999, the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces of the Nation stated: "I am sending you the documentation required by that Court in duly foliated pages (339); the same that by virtue of the provisions of Article 98 of Chapter V of the Organic Law of the Armed Forces of the Nation (LOFA), this documentation is SECRET and INVIOLABLE, and must be kept confidential; in this regard, thank you for returning it to my office." (bold and capital letters from the original). Cf. Communication from the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces, Note Dept.II-Icia.EMG.Section-"A" No. 261/99 of June 9, 1999 (case file evidence, p. 8495). 59 Cfr. Prosecution's View Order of the Second Criminal Party Court of August 23, 2006 (case file evidence, p. 8491). 60 Cfr. Brief of the attorney Eulogia Pantoja Vacaflor on behalf of the Flores Bedregal family, of August 28, 2006, filed on the same date (case file evidence, p. 485 and 486). 61 Cfr. Prosecution's View Order of the Second Circuit Criminal Court, of August 29, 2006 (case file evidence, p. 8501). 62 Cfr. Brief of the attorney Eulogia Pantoja Vacaflor addressed to the Second Circuit Criminal Court of La Paz, on behalf of the Flores Bedregal family, received on September 23, 2006, dated September 22, 2006 (case file evidence, p. 299 and 300). 63 Cfr. Order No. 129/2007 of the Second Circuit Criminal Court, of December 12, 2007, supra. 64 David Humberto Alarcón Romero, César Altamirano Lavadenz, Juan Gualberto Aquize Rada, Marcos Herminio Mena Vargas, Damián Gutiérrez Castro, and Sebastián Quispe Apaza were acquitted. Cf. Order No. 129/2007 of the Second Circuit Criminal Court, of December 12, 2007, supra. 17