39 Castrellón Santamaría, Jaime Ramírez Pedraza and Lori Berenson. The alleged victim’s lawyer was not present.77 88(23) On December 17, 1995, Lori Berenson’s defense lawyer presented a brief in which he requested the Special Military Examining Judge to “waive competence” and forward the case to the “ordinary jurisdiction,” because there had been an “inappropriate assessment of the figure of the crime of treason.”78. 88(24) On December 27, 1995, DINCOTE prepared “[Police] Deposition N° 140– DIVICOTE II–DINCOTE,” which classified the facts investigated as treason. The police investigation report summarized the background to the case and the PNP investigation procedure.79 88(25) On January 2, 1996, Military Examining Judge concluded the investigation80 and, the same day, the Army’s Special Military Prosecutor for Cases of Treason formulated the corresponding charge.81 Criminal proceeding in the military jurisdiction 88(26) The trial against the alleged victim for the crime of treason was held in the military jurisdiction, under provisions established in Decree Law No. 25,659 (supra para. 88(2)), with “faceless” judges and in private hearings.82 88(27) The defense lawyer’s access to the case file was hampered in the proceeding held in the military jurisdiction against Lori Berenson. The defense lawyer 77 Cf. record of reconstruction in the presence of the defendants: Lori Berenson, Pacífico Castrellón and Jaime Ramírez Pedraza on December 15, 1995 (file of probative evidence provided by the State, tome 2, folios 4398 to 4407); and record of reconstruction in the presence of Lori Berenson on December 15, 1995 (file of probative evidence provided by the State, tome 2, folios 4408 to 4410). 78 Cf. jurisdictional plea by the Special Military Examining Judge in relation to the case against Lori Berenson submitted by her defense lawyer on December 17, 1995 (file of appendixes to the application, tome 3, folios 945 to 948; and file of probative evidence provided by the State, tome 2, folios 4121 to 4124). 79 Cf. police investigation report No. 140-DIVICOTE II-DINCOTE of December 27, 1995 (file of appendixes to the application, tome 3, folios 1015 to 1114; and file of probative evidence provided by the State, tome 2, folios 4193 to 4292). 80 Cf. order to terminate the judicial investigation issued by the Special Military Judge on January 2, 1996 (file of probative evidence provided by the State, tome 3, folio 4744). 81 Cf. charge formulated by the Army’s Special Military Prosecutor for Cases of Treason on January 2, 1996 (file of probative evidence provided by the State, tome 3, folios 4745 to 4748). 82 Cf. order expanding the pre-trial proceedings issued by the Special Military Judge on December 1, 1995, in trial No. 032-TP-95 processed in the military jurisdiction against Miguel Rincón Rincón et al. for the crime of treason (file of appendixes to the application, tome 1, appendix 8, folio 98; file of probative evidence provided by the State, tome 2, folio 3957); police investigation report No. 140–DIVICOTE IIDINCOTE of December 27, 1995 (file of appendixes to the application, tome 3, folio 1015; and file of probative evidence provided by the State, tome 2, folio 4193).