18 Committal Judge of Cajatambo ordered that the on-site inspection be carried out, for which he asked the National Police to provide security guarantees stated that “the complainant [must] provide 76 transportation.” On September 23, 1991, the Provincial Prosecutor of Cajatambo asked the judge to extend the committal proceedings for one additional month, in order to carry out the on-site inspection, “take witness statements from Gudmer Tulio Zárate Osorio and Lorenzo Tolentino, notifying them in 77 accordance with the law and of the penalties applicable for noncompliance.” 74. On October 15, 1991, the Committal Judge of Cajatambo gave an order for the committal proceedings to be expanded and “for an on-site inspection to be performed at the Nunumia community center, Gorgor district, on the 30th day of the instant month at 10:00 a.m. [...] with transportation to be 78 provided by the interested party....” In a communication dated December 6, 1991, addressed to the Committal Judge of Cajatambo, the complainant Porfirio Osorio Rivera stated: Since the formality of the on-site inspection that you ordered for October 30, 1991, was not performed; for the reason, as you told me, that the court personnel was on strike; although I fulfilled my part by bringing 20 horses, which represented a major outlay to the detriment of my scant resources. I request that your office: indicate a new date and time for the on-site inspection 79 formality under the responsibility […].” 75. On January 13, 1992, the Mixed Provincial Prosecutor of Cajatambo issued a resolution 80 noting that the Cajatambo judge was absent from his court, and that there was no official to replace him. Again, on February 3, 1992, Mr. Porfirio Osorio reiterated his request that the Court of Cajatambo expand the complaint previously filed with the prosecutor’s office on May 17, 1991, to include the crime of forced 81 disappearance as defined in Article 323 of the Criminal Code. 76. On February 10, 1992, the Mixed Provincial Prosecution Office of Cajatambo issued an opinion stating that there was insufficient evidence pointing to the responsibility of Juan Carlos Tello in 82 the crime against personal liberty. On March 6, 1992, the Mixed Court of Cajatambo ordered the 83 expansion of the criminal proceedings to include the crime of forced disappearance. On May 4, 1992, Mr. Porfirio Osorio Rivera again asked the judge of Cajatambo to summon Gudmer Tulio Osorio, Aquiles Román Atencio, Patricio Chavarría Celestino, Lorenzo Tolentino Román, and Jorge Húngaro Atencio to appear as witnesses; however, the copies of the case file in the possession of the IACHR do not indicate that those formalities were ever carried out. 77. On June 12, 1991, the Mixed Court of Cajatambo resolved to shelve the proceedings for the crime of forced disappearance, in accordance with the opinion of the Provincial Prosecutor that Article 84 323 of the Criminal Code had been repealed by Decree Law No. 25475. Regarding the crime of 76 Annex 45: Resolution of the Committal Judge of Cajatambo, dated August 26, 1991, case file No. 24-91. 77 Annex 46: Ruling No. 92-91-MP-FPMC issued by the Provincial Prosecutor of Cajatambo on September 23, 1991, case file No. 24-91. 78 Annex 47: Resolution issued by the Committal Judge of Cajatambo on October 15, 1991, case file No. 24-91. 79 Annex 48: Document dated December 6, 1991, signed by Porfirio Osorio Rivera and addressed to the Committal Judge of Cajatambo. 80 Annex 49: Ruling No. 02-92-MP-FPMC by the Mixed Provincial Prosecution Office of Cajatambo, issued on January 13, 1992, case file No. 24-91. 81 Annex 50: Document dated February 3, 1992, signed by Porfirio Osorio Rivera and addressed to the Provincial Court of Cajatambo. 82 Annex 51: Ruling No. 11-92-MP-FPMC by the Mixed Provincial Prosecution Office of Cajatambo, issued on February 10, 1992, case file No. 24-91. 83 84 Annex 52: Resolution of the Committal Judge of Cajatambo, dated March 6, 1991, case file No. 24-91. Annex 53: Resolution of the Mixed Court of Cajatambo, dated June 12, 1992, case file No. 24-91, stating that “with the repeal of Article 323 of Legislative Decree No. 635, by No. 22 of Decree Law No. 25475, this committal proceeding, for the crime under investigation, is to be irrevocably archived…” Although Decree Law No. 25475 “established punishments for the crime of terrorism and procedures for its investigation, committal proceedings, and prosecution”, its Article 22 “repealed Chapter II of Title Continues…