that a criminal action should be filed against the prosecutor and the deputy prosecutor of the Second Criminal Provincial Prosecution Service of Ascope.102 E. The disciplinary administrative proceeding against the members of the Peruvian National Police 72. On March 5, 2008, Ms. Rojas Marín filed a complaint with the Trujillo Regional Inspectorate of the Peruvian National Police against four agents presumably implicated in the acts of rape and sexual torture against her.103 73. On May 2, 2008, the Pacasmayo Provincial Inspectorate of the Peruvian National Police issued a report concluding that: (i) administrative responsibility had not been established because the complainant had been detained in compliance with the law and with police procedures, taking into account that the presumed victim was not carrying identification documents and that was with two individuals who fled the scene, and (ii) it had not been determined that the presumed victim had been physically assaulted in the Police Station by the agents who were accused of this, because “the forensic medical examination was performed on the complainant four days after the detention [and] it was possible that [s]he had injured [her]self in order to harm the police agents who detained h[er] on [February 25, 2008].”104 74. On June 6, 2008, the President of the Second Chamber of the Trujillo Disciplinary Administrative Tribunal issued an order to remove the disciplinary administrative case against the accused agents to a higher authority.105 75. On September 2, 2008, the Territorial Disciplinary Administrative Tribunal decided that “there were no grounds for imposing sanctions on the agents […] as their disciplinary administrative responsibility in the events reported by [Azul Rojas Marín] had not been established; consequently, the closure of this case is ordered.”106 The Administrative Court found that it was not possible to verify that Ms. Rojas Marín had been raped or tortured, because the minor bodily injuries and the older anal fissures were insufficient to prove that they had been caused by the police agents, and, “in addition to the forensic medical examination being performed [four] days later, it should be taken into account, with regard to the anal fissures, that [Ms. Rojas Marín] […] practices unnatural sexual relations since the age of 14 and has sexual relations 3 or 4 times a day.”107 Initially, on December 31, 2008, the Superior Prosecutor, Head of the Decentralized Office of Internal Control of La Libertad and Santa had declared that the complaint filed against the prosecutors by Ms. Rojas Marín was unfounded. Cf. Decision of the Superior Prosecutor, Head of the Decentralized Office of Internal Control of La Libertad and Santa of December 31, 2008 (evidence file, folio 186); Remedy of appeal filed on February 13, 2009, by Ms. Rojas Marín against the decision of the Superior Prosecutor, Head of the Decentralized Office of Internal Control of La Libertad and Santa of December 31, 2008 por (evidence file, folios 187 to 192); Decision of the Superior Prosecutor, Head of the Decentralized Office of Internal Control of La Libertad and Santa of March 10, 2009 (evidence file, folio 193); Ruling issued by the Supreme Prosecutor for Internal Control on April 20, 2009 (evidence file, folio 195), and Decision of the Prosecutor General of November 19, 2010 (evidence file, folios 3023 to 3028). 102 Cf. Complaint filed by Azul Rojas Marín with the Trujillo Regional Inspectorate of the Peruvian National Police on March 5, 2008 (evidence file, folios 3030 and 3031). 103 Cf. Report of the Pacasmayo Provincial Inspectorate of the Peruvian National Police of May 2, 2008 (evidence file, folio 3056). 104 105 Cf. Order to remove the case to a higher authority of June 6, 2008 (evidence file, folio 3059). 106 Cf. Decision of the Territorial Disciplinary Administrative Tribunal of September 2, 2008 (evidence file, folio 3064). 107 3063). Cf. Decision of the Territorial Disciplinary Administrative Tribunal of September 2, 2008 (evidence file, folio 21