32 is most certainly the right to life.” This brief recounted a number of reports done by Amnesty International in 2009, 2008 and 2007 on the practice and application of the death penalty in China.39 91. On October 5, 2009, the Supreme Court’s Permanent Criminal Chamber issued an order in which it wrote the following: The extradition request under consideration has the following problem: i) although the crime of which the extraditurus is charged carries the death penalty or life imprisonment in the People’s Republic of China, no affidavit is enclosed certifying either that assurances have been given that the extraditurus will not be executed if convicted, or that those assurances have been requested. (…) Therefore, given the nature of the request under consideration, THEY RETURNED THE REQUEST so that (…) the necessary correction could be made based on the court’s observation; 40 once the requested action has been taken, a hearing date can be rescheduled (…). 92. On October 12, 2009, Mr. Luis Lamas Puccio filed a second preventive petition of habeas corpus, based on the October 5, 2009 ruling of the Supreme Court’s Permanent Criminal Chamber. In that second petition, he argued the following: (…) The ruling of the Supreme Court’s Second Criminal Chamber points up a procedural problem, but does not address the merits, (…). (…) it is self-evident that “the minimum guarantees have not been given” to ensure that this person will not be executed once he is taken back to China. The idea was always to catch the national authorities off guard by coming up with a legal provision that has nothing to do with the 41 crime of which Mr. Wong Ho Wing is charged. 93. That same day, Lima’s 53rd Criminal Court agreed to hear the habeas corpus petition and set October 16, 2009 as the date for taking the respondents’ statements.42 94. On December 10, 2009, the Ambassador Extraordinaire and Plenipotentiary of the People’s Republic of China in the Republic of Peru sent a official communiqué to the President of the Supreme Court’s Permanent Criminal Chamber pledging that “Huang Huang Haiyong or Wong Ho Wing will not be executed if the extradition request made by the Government of the People’s Republic of China is granted.”43 95. On December 11, 2009, the Ambassador Extraordinaire and Plenipotentiary of the People’s Republic of China in the Republic of Peru sent a communication to the President of the Supreme Court’s Permanent Criminal Chamber, which read as follows: 39 Annex 22. Amicus Curiae from the National Human Rights Coordinator in extradition case 03-2009. Attachment to the communication received from the petition on February 2, 2010. 40 Annex 23. Order dated October 5, 2009. Attachment to the petitioner’s October 11, 2009 communication. 41 Annex 24. Petition of preventive habeas corpus, dated October 12, 2009. Attachment to the communication received from the petitioner on October 13, 2009. 42 Annex 25. Order of October 12, 2009, Case file H.C. No 44215-09-CR.- Attachment to the State’s December 4, 2009 communication. 43 Annex 26. Communication N.O. No. 200/2009. Attachment to the petitioner’s December 15, 2009 communication.