25 82. That same day, under the terms of Decision 17/87, arrest warrants were issued against 18 of the alleged victims, whose pretrial detention had exceeded the allowable term therefor.91 A constitutional motion against the arrests was lodged on June 6 and 8, 92 along with a writ of habeas corpus.93 On June 9, 1989, the motion for constitutional relief lodged by Mr. Marcial and Mr. Argüelles was denied on grounds that it would encroach on military jurisdiction.94 83. On June 14, 1989,95 the Prosecutor General of the Armed Forces and the convicted defendants invoked a provision in article 445 bis of the Code of Military Justice96 to forward the case to the National Appeals Chamber.97 ARS 599,999,260; Mr. Di Rosa, ARS 140,144,219; Mr. Galluzzi and Mr. Pontecorvo, ARS 220,000,000; Mr. Galluzzi, Mr. Machín and Mr. Morón, ARS 413,373,833; Mr. Galluzzi and Mr. Machín, ARS 156,300.00; Mr. Galluzzi, Mr. Mercau, Mr. Luis José López Mattheus and Mr. Allendes, ARS 1,314,892,784. 91 Decision 17/89, issued by the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces on June 5, 1989, ordering the arrest of Mr. Galluzzi, Mr. Pontecorvo, Mr. Di Rosa, Mr. Giordano, Mr. Tomasek, Mr. Machín, Mr. Candurra, Mr. Aracena, Mr. Maluf, Mr. Candurra, Mr. Arancibia, Mr. Morón, Mr. Argüelles, Mr. Cardozo, Mr. Mattheus, Mr. Allendes, Mr. Muñoz and Mr. Óbolo (evidence file, folios 7990 to 7992). 92 Motion of “appeal” (constitutional relief) lodged by Mr. Cardozo, Mr. Argüelles, Mr. Mattheus, Mr. Allendes, Mr. Pérez, Mr. Marcial, Mr. Muñoz, Mr. Óbolo, Mr. Arancibia, Mr. Morón, Mr. Candurra on June 6, 1989 (evidence file, folios 7993 and 7994). 93 Writ of habeas corpus filed by the spouse of Mr. Argüelles on June 8, 1989 (evidence file, folios 1514 to 1522). 94 Decision by the National Judicial Branch, June 9, 1989 (evidence file, folios 1528 to 1530). 95 Judgment of the National Chamber of Criminal Cassation, April 3, 1995 (evidence file, folio 2057). 96 Code of Military Justice (Law 14.029, July 4, 1951): “Art. 445 bis – subparagraph 1: In peacetime, appeals may be lodged against final determinations by military courts addressing strictly military crimes and be remitted to the Federal Chamber of Appeals with jurisdiction in the place where the acts occurred that led to the prosecution of the case. Subparagraph 2: Allowable grounds for the appeal may be: (a) Noncompliance with or mistaken application of the law; (b) Noncompliance with essential procedures prescribed in the law for the process; Noncompliance with procedures prescribed in the law for the process may be declared, particularly, for those decisions that: I. Limit the right to defense; II. Disqualify evidence that is essential for resolving the case. (c) Existence of evidence that could not be brought forward or submitted for well-founded reasons. […] Subparagraph 7: Hearings shall be governed by the following rules: A. Debate shall be public, unless the court has grounds to issue an order to the contrary for reasons of morality or safety. B. The hearing shall be continuous; otherwise it may be declared null and void. If necessary, it shall continue to be held over the course of consecutive days and may be suspended only for a maximum of 10 days if necessary to resolve incidental matters that require time to be decided upon; if any kind of evidence needs to be produced away from the venue of the hearing; if the process requires the presence of a witness, expert witness or interpreter who is absent at the time; in case of illness of a judge or any of the parties, or if a new fact comes to light and the parties need time to exercise their right of defense. […] D. With the authorization of the president, the parties and the members of the court may freely cross-examine witnesses or experts. The president shall disqualify leading, suggestive or unnecessary questions and, on his own motion or at the request of the parties, may order that the transcripts or audio recording of the statements, in whole or in part, be added to the case material (evidence file, folios 13025 and 13026). 97 Appeal by the attorney of Mr. Argüelles (evidence file, folios 1304 to 1306).