39 a) for practical purposes, there is no difference between the crime of terrorism and the crime of treason or aggravated terrorism classified under Peruvian law and both are open to broad interpretation which, in turn, leaves room for confusion. They are open-ended criminal classifications “couched in vague language,” contrary to the modern principles of criminal law that require very specific terminology with little or no room for interpretation. This is a violation of a basic canon of criminal law, which requires a precise legal description or definition of the crime or other classification; b) the principle of nullum crimen nulla poena sine lege praevia is the cornerstone of a government of laws and a basic principle of criminal law. When coupled with the principles of legal certainty and juridical security, a range of principles follow that serve to reinforce it: 1) guarantees of criminal procedural law; 2) guarantees for those imprisoned or in custody; 3) the guarantee of a competent, independent and impartial judge previously established by law; 4) the guarantee of judicial control of execution of sentence; 5) the principle of nonrespectivity of laws and prohibition of retroactivity when unfavorable to the defendant; 6) the principle prohibiting the use of analogy in criminal law; 7) the principle of adjudication by the laws and the constitution in effect at the time the crime was committed; 8) the principle of the proportionality of the sentence; 9) the principle prohibiting judicial lawmaking; 10) the principle prohibiting ambiguity in the law; and 11) the principle whereby sentences may not be amended for the worse, or reformatio in peius, etc.; 115. c) the crime of treason, as the State itself has acknowledged, is the nomen iuris of aggravated terrorism. Apart from being open-ended, this classification removes prosecution of this criminal behavior “from the jurisdiction of the competent, independent and impartial tribunal previously established by law, which is the regular court, and transfers it to the military court.” Furthermore, “the crime of treason as a classification […] under criminal law has nothing to do with terrorism.” Treason is a crime against the security of a nation and is criminalized in order to protect a nation’s independence, sovereignty or integrity, which is not at issue in this case; and d) Article 2 of Decree-Law No. 25,659 provides who the authors of the crime of treason are. However, it makes no provision for alien perpetrators. In other words, it does not specify whether the State is demanding allegiance of certain foreign citizens, and under what conditions it must do so. This is a violation of the principle of nullum crimen nulla poena sine lege praevia. Allegiance to the Peruvian nation is the duty of Peruvian citizens. Aliens cannot be prosecuted for a failure to fulfill a duty of allegiance that the law does not require. Argument of the State: The legal classification of the crime is in Decree-Law No. 25,659, promulgated in August 1992. In other words, “at the time [the alleged victims] were detained and brought to trial, the laws were already on the books.” They “knew perfectly well what drastic legal consequences they were risking.”