104. The same June 18, 1993, the National Penitentiary Council was advised that the presumed victim should be released. 172 Following this decision, Ms. J. left Peru in August 1993 (infra para. 114). 105. Both those convicted in the judgment and the senior prosecutor filed an appeal for a declaration of nullity against the judgment of June 18, 1993 173 (supra para. 104). On December 27, 1993, the “faceless” Supreme Court of Justice annulled the judgment of June 18, 1993, and ordered that “a new oral hearing be held by another special criminal chamber.” The grounds for this decision were that the judgment of June 18, 1993, “did not make a proper assessment of the facts that were the subject of the charges and did not assess the evidence provided appropriately in order to establish the innocence or guilt of the accused.” 174 106. On February 9, 1994, the “faceless” National Counter-terrorism Chamber took over the hearing of the case, an oral hearing was scheduled for February 18, 1994, and a warrant was issued to re-arrest Ms. J. 175 On April 5, 1994, the proceeding against Ms. J. was held in reserve. 176 This decision was confirmed by the Supreme Court of Justice on September 24, 1997, by judges identified with a numerical code. 177 On December 9, 1997, and on March 1, 2001, in judgments with regard to other accused in the same proceedings, the action against Ms. J. was held in reserve. 178 E.4 Criminal procedure following the 2003 amendment of the counterterrorism law 107. Pursuant to the provisions of Legislative Decree No. 926 (supra para. 75), on May 20, 2003, the National Counter-terrorism Chamber declared “null, all proceedings with regard to [Ms. J.],” because the nullity established in the said Legislative Decree was applicable. In this regard, the Chamber declared that “the charges [of January 8, 1993,] were unsubstantiated,” and that all the proceedings as of the decision of February 1, 1993, declaring that there were grounds to proceed to an oral hearing against Ms. J., including that one, were null (supra para. 101). The Chamber noted 172 3787). Cf. Note of the Lima Superior Court of Justice of June 18, 1993 (file of annexes to the answering brief, annex 49, folio 173 Cf. Decision of the National Counter-terrorism Chamber of April 2, 2004 (file of annexes to the Merits Report, annex 24, folio 290). In addition, the judgment of June 18, 1993, that acquitted Ms. J. “orders that, should this judgment not be expressly appealed, the declaration of nullity is granted ex officio with regard to the acquittal.” Judgment of the Lima Superior Court of Justice of June 18, 1993 (file of annexes to the answering brief, annex 48, folio 3785). 174 Judgment of the Supreme Court of Justice of Lima of December 27, 1993 (file of annexes to the answering brief, annex 50, folio 3789). 175 Cf. Decision of the National Counter-terrorism Chamber of February 9, 1994 (file of annexes to the answering brief, annex 51, folios 3791 and 3792). 176 Cf. Judgment of the Special Criminal Chamber for Terrorism of April 5, 1993 (file of annexes to the State’s brief of June 24, 2013, annex 23, folios 4798 to 4826). See also, Judgment of the Special Criminal Chamber for Terrorism of April 24, 1993 (file of annexes to the State’s brief of June 24, 2013, annex 24, folios 4828 to 4830). In this regard, the Code of Criminal Procedures establishes that “[w]hen the court has received the proceedings against the accused who is absent, they will be forwarded to the prosecutor, and the latter shall bring charges. After renewing the arrest warrant and issuing orders summoning the accused and stating the offenses that he or she is accused of in the indictment, the court shall hold the proceeding in reserve until the accused is arrested.” 1941 Code of Criminal Procedures, article 319 (file of annexes to the State’s brief of August 14, 2013, folio 5162). 177 Cf. Decision of the Supreme Court of Justice of September 24, 1997, in case file No. 608-93 (file of annexes to the answering brief, annex 52, folios 3797 to 3800). 178 Cf. Judgment of the Special Criminal Chamber of the Lima Superior Court of December 9, 1997 (file of annexes to the State’s brief of August 14, 2013, folio 5571), and Judgment of the Special Criminal Chamber of the Lima Superior Court of March 1, 2001 (file of annexes to the State’s brief of August 14, 2013, folio 5585). These decisions were confirmed, respectively by the supreme writ of execution of the Criminal Chamber of July 2, 1998 (file of annexes to the State’s brief of August 14, 2013, folios 5573 to 5576), and the supreme writ of execution of the Criminal Chamber of March 6, 2001 (file of annexes to the State’s brief of August 14, 2013, folios 5588 and 5589). 34