24 OTHER FORMS OF REPARATION Arguments of the victim’s representatives 64. As measures of restitution, the victim’s representatives requested that: a) The Supreme Court judgment convicting the victim be nullified, in order to restore to him his good name and honor, since the pardon is a political –not jurisdictional- remedy; b) The police, criminal and court records be expunged in order to facilitate the victim’s re-assimilation into society and the work force; under Law No. 2699476, this should have been done ex officio. FEDEPAZ has made several requests to this effect, but without result; and c) Decree-Laws 25,475 and 25,659, on the crimes of terrorism and treason, be amended, as they have breached principles and rights recognized in the 1993 Constitution and the American Convention. This was the finding in the “Report prepared by the Commission to Study and Review Legislation Enacted since April 5, 1992.” The application of those laws to the present case violated the victim’s rights. Consequently, the victim’s representatives are requesting that Peru adopt legislative or such other measures as may be necessary to adapt its domestic laws on terrorism to the Convention, pursuant to Articles 1 and 2 thereof, thereby ensuring the rights and freedoms recognized in the Convention and guaranteeing that such violations will not recur. They are asking the Court to apply its jurisprudence in the Barrios Altos Case and find that those provisions of Amnesty Laws 25,475 and 25,659 that violate rights recognized in the American Convention have no legal effect vis-à-vis the present case or other similar cases where the provisions of those laws have been applied. 65. The victim’s representatives also requested the following measures of satisfaction and guarantees of non-recurrence: a) That in Peru’s five major newspapers, including the Official Gazette, and in prestigious international newspapers, the State publish communiqués containing an acknowledgment of responsibility, a declaration that the victim was innocent, an apology to the victim and his next of kin and the State’s pledge that events such as those that occurred in the present case will never occur again in Peru; b) That, at least once, the State publish the text of the judgments on the merits and on reparations in the official gazette and in various mass communications media, and c) That the State effectively investigate and punish the material and intellectual authors of these crimes and the accessories after the fact. The Commission’s arguments 66. The Commission, for its part, stated that: