41 retirement pension to which he was legally entitled”140. This judgment delivered by the lower Civil Court of Lima was appealed and, on October 29, 1993, the Second Civil Chamber of the Superior Court of Justice of Lima confirmed the decision and On June 28, 1994, the declared the application for amparo admissible141. Constitutional and Social Law Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice declared that the judgment of the Second Civil Chamber of the Superior Court of Lima could not be annulled and declared the application for amparo admissible; consequently, it ordered the SBS “to comply by restoring to the plaintiff the retirement pension to which he [was] legally entitled”142. 89(ff) On June 14, 1995, by administrative decision No. 391-95, the SBS decided to equalize the amount of the pension of Mr. Bartra Vásquez, “taking into consideration, in this regard, the salaries that are paid to the employees of the Superintendency, and ordering that the beneficiary be paid the corresponding repayments, as detailed in the appendix that […] forms an integral part of this administrative decision”143. 89(gg) On March 12, 2002, the SBS issued administrative decision No. 254-2002, in which, inter alia, it ordered “[t]hat Decision SBS No. 391-95, of June 14, 1995, should be complied with, deducting from the sum to be paid to Reymert Bartra Vásquez, the amounts that the Ministry of Economy and Finance has paid to him in application of article 5 of Decree Law No. 25792, from November 1, 1992, to January 23, 2002”. In the third article of this 2002 decision, la SBS “[reserved] the right […], in accordance with the judgment of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights[…], to deduct the sum that may have been paid in excess when complying with Decision SBS No. 391-95, of June 14, 1995; in which case, the provisions of article 53 of Decree Law No. 20530, which expressly authorizes encumbering pensions to pay debts, will be taken into consideration”144. 89(hh) On March 18, 2002, the SBS paid Mr. Bartra Vásquez the amount determined in administrative decision No. 254-2002, corresponding to repayment of the equalized pension amounts that he had failed to receive from November 1992 to 140 Cf. decision of the lower Civil Court of Lima delivered on January 7, 1993, regarding the application for amparo filed by Reymert Bartra Vásquez (file of appendices to the application, appendix 44, folios 178 to 180). 141 Cf. decision of the Second Civil Chamber of the Superior Court of Lima delivered on October 29, 1993, regarding the application for amparo filed by Reymert Bartra Vásquez (file of appendices to the application, appendix 45, folios 181 and 182). 142 Cf. judgment of the Constitutional and Social Law Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice delivered on June 28, 1994, published in the Official Gazette El Peruano on September 14, 1994, regarding the application for amparo filed by Reymert Bartra Vásquez (file of appendices to the application, appendix 46, folios 183 and 184). 143 Cf. infra note 144. Cf. administrative decision SBS No. 254-2002 of March 12, 2002, with regard to Reymert Bartra Vásquez (file on merits and possible reparations, tome IV, appendix 6 of the communication of July 22, 2002, presented by the representatives of the alleged victims and their next of kin, folios 991 to 994). 144