23 date on which the said constitutional text had been promulgated.” The Law concluded by affirming that “the presidential periods initiated before the Constitution came into force are not taken into account in the calculation;”16 56.5) On August 29, 1996, the Lima Bar Association filed suit with the Constitutional Court challenging the constitutionality of Law No. 26,657, arguing that it violated article 112 of the Constitution. The Court admitted this suit on September 23, 199617; 56.6) On November 20, 1996, the case was heard in a public hearing in the presence of the seven justices of the Constitutional Court. On December 27, 1996, the working paper on the issue was discussed, and adopted by five votes in favor and two against; this was noted in the official record. The draft judgment stated that the law was non-applicable rather than unconstitutional, in application of the “oversight authority”. In this respect, article 4 of the Constitutional Court’s statute establishes that six votes in favor are required in order to decide petitions on unconstitutionality. The same evening, the media informed that the Court had discussed the case18; 56.7) The draft prepared by Justice Rey Terry, which had been discussed on December 27, 1996, was removed by Justice García Marcelo. The latter 16 Cf. Law No. 26,657, “Interpreting Article 112 of the Constitution concerning presidential reelection”, promulgated on August 23, 1996, Tome I, Annex 3; and action of August 29, 1996, challenging the constitutionality of Law No. 26,657, filed by the Lima Bar Association, of August 29, 1996, Tome I, Annex 4. 17 Cf. Articles 200.4 and 203.7, of the Peruvian Constitution, promulgated on December 29, 1993, Tome I, Annex 1; Articles 25.7 and 31 of the statute of the Constitutional Court, Law No. 26,435 promulgated on December 23, 1994, Tome I, Annex 2; Law No. 26,657, “Interpreting Article 112 of the Constitution concerning presidential re-election”, promulgated on August 23, 1996, Tome I, Annex 3; action of August 29, 1996, challenging the constitutionality of Law No. 26,657, filed by the Lima Bar Association, Tome I, Annex 4; Judgment of January 3, 1997, of the Constitutional Court in file 002-96-I/TC declaring Interpretation Law No. 26,657 non-applicable, Tome I, Annex 7; and testimony of Delia Revoredo Marsano before the Inter-American Court, on November 22, 2000. 18 Cf. Article 138 of the Peruvian Constitution, promulgated on December 29, 1993, Tome I, Annex 1; Articles 4, 22, 33 and 34 of the statute of the Constitutional Court, Law No. 26,435 promulgated on December 23, 1994, Tome I, Annex 2; draft judgment of the Constitutional Court of November 20, 1996, Tome I, Annex 6; questioning of Justice Delia Revoredo Marsano before the Investigation Committee of the Congress of the Republic of Peru, Tome I, Annex 14; document dated May 6, 1997 signed by congressman, Javier Alva Orlandini, member of the Investigation Committee, Tome I, Annex 18; transcript of the statement of Justice Manuel Aguirre Roca before the Investigation Committee responsible for clarifying the complaints concerning the Constitutional Court on March 31, 1997, Tome II, Annex 5; transcript of the statement of Justice Luis Guillermo Díaz Valverde before the Investigation Committee responsible for clarifying the complaints concerning the Constitutional Court on March 31, 1997, Tome II, Annex 5; transcript of the statement of Justice Guillermo Rey Terry before the Investigation Committee responsible for clarifying the complaints concerning the Constitutional Court on April 4, 1997, Tome II, Annex 6; transcript of the statement of Justice José García Marcelo before the Investigation Committee responsible for clarifying the complaints concerning the Constitutional Court of April 4, 1997, Tome II, Annex 6; transcript of the statement of Justice Francisco Javier Acosta Sánchez before the Investigation Committee responsible for clarifying the complaints concerning the Constitutional Court on April 14, 1997, Tome II, Annex 7; transcript of the statement of Justice Ricardo Nugent before the Investigation Committee responsible for clarifying the complaints concerning the Constitutional Court of April 18, 1997, Tome II, Annex 8; official letter from the office of the President of the Constitutional Court of April 10, 1997, Tome III, Annex 1; letter from the justices of the Constitutional Court, Ricardo Nugent, Manuel Aguirre Roca, Guillermo Rey Terry and Delia Revoredo Marsano, to the President of the Evaluation SubCommittee of May 14, 1997, Tome III, Annex 8; transcript of statements made before the Congressional Permanent Commission on May 23, 1997, Tome III, Annex 11; testimony of Delia Revoredo Marsano before the Inter-American Court, on November 22, 2000; and technical opinion of Enrique Bernales Ballesteros of December 12, 2000.