the same time, forensic evidence points to crossfire in combat, not to a summary execution of overpowered, unarmed MRTA guerrillas.291 234. The judgment also discussed the death of Eduardo Nicolás Cruz Sánchez as follows: [… W]ith respect to the death of Cruz Sánchez, the only unfinished matter is to determine whether the extrajudicial execution of this victim, based on the facts held as proven in the trial judgment, was ordered by defendants Hermoza Ríos, Montesinos Torres and Huamán Ascurra. The suggestion of an alleged parallel line of command has already been discarded. Police officers Torres Arteaga and Robles Reynoso named only Zamudio Aliaga, who indeed denies it. It is true that Army Lieutenant Colonel Zamudio Aliaga was a member of the SIN and Army Lieutenant Colonel Huamán Ascurra and presidential advisor Montesinos Torres were in his line of command, and that the latter was part of the COT, as were Army General Hermoza Ríos, Head of CCFFAA, and several others. This assertion can thus be considered oblique evidence—the fact alluded to is not highly probable—and, indeed, contingent or immaterial. The military operation unfolded very quickly, it was precise and effective, and as has been established, it was conducted under orders for cases of injured and captured MRTA members. […] [… I]t can therefore be asserted only that the extrajudicial execution, as held by the trial court, and which was not included in the appeal, was an isolated crime and not part of the operation or the plans developed by higher-ranking authorities.292 235. Finally, the Transitory Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court found no need to vacate the judgment of the Special Criminal Chamber of Lima.293 236. The lead prosecutor of the Second Criminal Prosecutor General agreed on January 10, 2014 that “sufficient copies be forwarded to the relevant provincial prosecutor [to] investigate the facts”294 surrounding the death of Eduardo Nicolás Cruz Sánchez, in accordance with the provisions of operative paragraph five of the judgment of October 15, 2012 (supra para. 227). J. Criminal proceedings against Alberto Fujimori Fujimori and Manuel Tullume Gonzáles 237. The Prosecutor General, upholding the right of former president Alberto Fujimori Fujimori to have a preliminary hearing, filed a complaint against him with the National Congress on August 4, 2003 for the alleged crime of murder against Eduardo Nicolás Cruz Sánchez, Herma Luz Meléndez Cueva and Víctor Salomón Peceros Pedraza, so that his constitutionally permissible charge could be approved and he could be tried. The complaint suggested two different hypotheses about the alleged execution of the MRTA members: first, that the act had been ordered in advance as part of the design of the operation, or second, Ruling by the Transitory Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court on an appeal to vacate judgment, 35212012 July 24, 2013 (evidence file, volume XXI, helpful evidence, folio 14711). 291 Ruling by the Transitory Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court on an appeal to vacate judgment, 35212012 July 24, 2013 (evidence file, volume XXI, helpful evidence, folio 14721). 292 Cf. Ruling by the Transitory Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court on an appeal to vacate judgment, 3521-2012 July 24, 2013 (evidence file, volume XXI, helpful evidence, folio 14723). 293 Opinion 018-2014 by the Second Criminal Prosecutor General, January 10, 2014 (evidence file, volume XXXI, annex 5 to the State’s final written arguments, folios 21068 to 21069). 294