103. On February 13, 2009, the Second Supraprovincial Criminal Prosecution Service ruled that “THERE ARE NO GROUNDS FOR FILING A CRIMINAL COMPLAINT against THOSE WHO MIGHT BE RESPONSIBLE for the alleged crime against Humanity—Forced Disappearance—to the detriment of Teresa Díaz Aparicio,”, and ordered that the files be provisionally archived. The following considerations were highlighted: TWELFTH: (…) the list in the account of persons detained in the months of July and August 1992 in DIRCOTE PNP in the case file does not include the name of Teresa Díaz Aparicio, also (…) the DIRCOTE Registry of Detainees does not record the person of Teresa Díaz Aparicio. As for the account of the police staff who provided services in the DIRCOTE Detainee Monitoring Office in July and August 1992, there is a list on page 1206, which includes certain names of the police personnel that were duly identified as indicated in Report No. 1607-2007-DIRCOTE/PNP-OFICODET on page 1196. SIXTEENTH: (…) it is indicated that the person of Teresa Díaz Aparicio has been missing since July 1992, which has been confirmed not only by statements made by her next of kin Federico Díaz Aparicio and Petronila Viviana Becerra Raimondi, but also by her absence from work, which was the reason for unjustifiably stopping her teaching activities in the School of Social Work of UNMSM, where she had only picked up her earnings up to July 1992, in addition to which there is no record of any migration movement from 1985 to the present. That said disappearance is forced, because there are clues that, in said action, DIRCOTE personnel might have participated, because there had been a detention of Teresa Díaz Aparicio in March 1989, in which, on the basis of Report No. 888-D3-SDIRCOTE, DIRCOTE identified Teresa Díaz Aparicio Díaz as a member of the support system for the Communist Party of Peru―Shining Path, in charge of providing housing, food, medical assistance, and other needs of the insurgent-terrorist group, which was dismissed by the investigation itself carried out at that time, so that the Forty-First Provincial Prosecution Service of Lima ordered her release, and although no criminal proceedings or criminal investigation for the crime of terrorism were pending, police troops of DIRCOTE had broken into and searched her home in August 1989 because they had linked her to the terrorist organization the Shining Path, regarding which the above-mentioned wronged person filed a habeas corpus petition complaining to the authorities that police troops of DIRCOTE had entered her home on August 10, 1989, ordering that she appear the following day at the offices of DIRCOTE, although there was no pending investigation against her, on the basis of which her liberty was already being threatened, and because these incidents are common practice in the Police, according to the report issued by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, these incidents would tend to establish a crime; nevertheless, it has been impossible to identify the alleged persons responsible, because of which the case was provisionally archived, and it had to be investigated at the police level by the Police Division of the Public Prosecutor’s Office so that they could report any progress being made in the case. 87 104. On August 8, 2012, the Second Supraprovincial Criminal Prosecution Service requested the National Criminal Chamber and the Special Criminal Chamber—keeping the identity of the declarants confidential to ensure their safety—information about the persons identified using code names subject to the Effective Collaboration Law or who had been subjected to proceedings of premature findings proceedings filed with the courts for the crime of forced disappearance in the year 1992, because they could yield relevant information or new elements that could reorient the investigation on the disappearance of Teresa Díaz Aparicio. It was also requested that steps be taken to receive inquest statements from these persons and, if their appearance was not possible, then they should provide the reason for it. 88 87 Annex 30. Resolution issued by the Second Supraprovincial Prosecution Service, case file 11-2007, February 13, 2009, appearing in the communication from the petitioners of July 27, 2011. 88 Annex 31. Resolution issued by the Second Supraprovincial Prosecution Service, case file 11-2007, August 8, 2012, appearing in the communication from the state No. 7-5-M/514 of November 7, 2012.