18 was then transferred to the judicial authorities. Similarly, the Ministry of Justice began a comprehensive review of the cases pending before the InterAmerican Commission and Court, in order to resolve them through a friendly settlement or the acknowledgement of State responsibility. In additio, on December 5, 2000, Supreme Resolution “R.S. 281-2000-JUS” created a “Commission to Study and Review Legislation issued since April 5, 1992,” which undertook the review of the main legal provisions issued during the previous regime, to determine violations of the Constitution or of the State’s human rights obligations, and the problems these had caused. The Commission’s report took into consideration comments on the terrorism legislation made by the Inter-American Court, the Ombudsman’s office, and the human rights community and considered that it contained violations that were unacceptable to the constitutional norms on legality, liberty, due process and prison treatment, closely related to the provisions of the international instruments applicable in these cases. In 1996, pressure exercised by the human rights community had forced the Government of then President Fujimori to permit the creation of a “High-Level Commission” presided by the Ombudsman, to recommend the release from prison of innocent individuals, who had been accused or convicted of terrorism. Based on this Commission’s recommendations, 502 people were released from prison. The report of the High-Level Commission, published in August 2000, included a series of recommendations regarding the reform of the legislation in force, which tied in with conclusions of the Court’s principal rulings in that regard and influenced the authorities. From August 1996 to December 1999, more than 600 people were acquitted. The report also stated that the civil Chamber responsible for the cases after the “faceless” courts had ceased had furnished “significant proof of its commitment to respecting fundamental rights.” The Judiciary commenced a process of adapting to the transition to democracy and dismantling the machinery it had set up for its functioning during the 1990s. On June 4, 2002, during the witness’s mandate, a “Truth and Reconciliation Commission” was created to establish the truth regarding the principal events and the violent conditions experienced in Peru; its final report was published on August 28, 2003. The Government also appointed a Special Commission to monitor compliance with the recommendations of this report. The Lori Berenson case was not discussed specifically by the Cabinet during his Government. He knew that there had been public discussion of the case, especially in 1998, when the alleged victim was convicted by a military court. In June 1998, the United States Ambassador to Peru, Dennis Jett, made a public statement requesting that Lori Berenson should be brought before a civil court. The military justice system annulled the proceeding. When his Government took office, the case had been transferred to the ordinary jurisdiction. The witness considers that he fulfilled his constitutional obligation of not interfering in the course of a judicial proceeding. No formal protests were received owing to the result of this case. He knew about two official statements made by the United States State Department,