9 Allan García-Pérez, and left the meeting at his office to obtain a coffee; on his return an assistant handed him a manila envelope bearing the stamp of the Press Office of the President of the Republic. He opened the envelope, and saw that smoke was issuing from it; he threw the envelope away from him with his left hand and heard it detonate, as a result of which he lost his left arm, his eardrums were pierced, and he suffered severe burns which almost totally incapacitated his entire left thorax; a great power explosive had been used which, as communicated in a report form the Inspectorate General produced in connection with Ministerial Decision No. 208/91 dated March 21, 1991, can only be handled by specially trained personnel. From his investigations he learned that only four members of the Police Force had received that training, one of whom is Commandant Juan Carlos Mejía-León. The further stated that this type of explosive is only used by Navy units specializing in demolitions and needs to be stored in a special environment. The Navy is the only institution to possess that explosive, and no loss or removal had been reported. It was the witness' view that Commandant Mejía-León participated in the manufacture of the artefact used in the attempt on his life. In response to a question from Judge Montiel-Argüello as to whether there was any connection between the attack against him and the Castillo Páez Case, Dr. Zúñiga-Paz said that the Castillo Páez Case was "the last straw." He mentioned two other cases that could have a bearing on the attempt on his life, including the case against Mr. Allan García, and the case concerning the homicide investigation in the "Caso de las Penales" He testified that when Mr. Allan García first entered the Hall of the Chamber of Deputies he was smiling, but that he became extremely perturbed when the expert opinion was communicated to him; on leaving he said: "You will pay for this." The witness therefore did not exclude the possibility that the attack was connected with other cases. f. Report of expert Mr. Enrique Bernales-Ballesteros He testified on the practice of disappearances in Peru and the situation of violence in general (infra, para. 42). He related his experience with violence in Peru and provided statistics on the subject: as of 1989, "Shining Path" (Sendero Luminoso) had begun to escalate its activities in Peru, transforming the city into a hotbed of armed political violence. He told how the disappearance of persons began to manifest itself in parallel with this upsurge of violence, following the same pattern of behavior that some military and police agents had used in the interior and in the city of Lima, thus stepping up the number of disappearances in that city. There was some distrust of the population, rural dwellers in the interior and students in the urban centers, so that the Judiciary found itself pressured by the country's military leaders. He explained that between 1984 and 1990, 1,916 cases of forced disappearance in Peru had been communicated to the United Nations Human Rights Committee, and produced documents to support that figure. In connection with that statement, at the same hearing the representative of the State averred that subversion had need of human beings to swell its ranks and that many persons had been abducted many persons to join it and make it look as though they had disappeared. However, the expert replied that most of the complaints were lodged by the victims' relatives, who were present when the events occurred and who blamed the military or the police. According to the expert, "Shining Path" was also responsible for the disappearance of some persons, but the disappearance of most of the persons whose names are known were reported by their families, who were able to point to members of the military, and to a lesser extent, to members of the police force as the perpetrators.