22 54.7. On June 14, 1995, the Congress of the Republic of Peru enacted Law No. 25,479, which became effective on June 15, 1995. The above mentioned law granted amnesty to members of the security forces and civilians who were subjected to police reports, investigations, proceedings or convictions, or who were serving prison terms on the grounds of violations to human rights committed between 1980 and 1995. A few days later, the Peruvian Congress passed a second bill of amnesty (Law No. 26492), which inter alia barred judges from rendering decisions on the legality or applicability of the first amnesty law.19 c) Forced disappearance of Mr. Santiago Gómez-Palomino20 54.8. Mr. Santiago Gómez-Palomino was born in the city of Lima, Peru, on May 13, 1965. At the time of the event, he was 27 years old, single and had earned a high school degree. The victim lived with his common-law wife Esmila Liliana ConisllaCárdenas and her son, in the residence of his cousin María Elsa Chipana-Flores, located at Block A, plot 2, “San Pedro de Chorrillos,” Lima. Mr. Gómez-Palomino worked in a Chinese food “chifa” restaurant situated in the locality of Chorrillos, and as a gardener in a private home. He was a member of the Asociación Israelita del Nuevo Pacto Universal (Israelite Association of the New Universal Pact), Church of Itillacta, Chorrillos, Lima. 54.9. At dawn, on July 9, 1992, a group of men and women stormed into the residence of María Elsa Chipana-Flores, where Mr. Santiago Gómez-Palomino had been living for about a fortnight, together with his common-law wife Esmila Liliana Conislla-Cárdenas and her son. The members of this group wore balaclavas over their faces, wore military boots and uniforms, carried flashlights and longarms (Light Automatic Rifles). They dragged Mr. Gómez-Palomino out of his room, battered and insulted him and asked him for names of persons, including one individual by the surname of Mendoza, who was supposed to be the owner of the house. Furthermore, they searched the whole property, tied up and gagged and threatened Mrs. Esmila Liliana Conislla-Cárdenas and Mrs. María Elsa Chipana-Flores with their guns. After searching the place, they withdrew taking Mr. GómezPalomino in a vehicle that was waiting outside the house, without showing a judicial warrant or administrative order or informing him of the reasons why he was being arrested or the place to which he was being taken. 54.10. After learning about such events, Mrs. Victoria Margarita Palomino-Buitrón started to look for her son in police facilities, judicial seats, hospitals and morgues without results. In her initial search, which lasted approximately one year, she was faith and credit (affidavit) by the expert Sofía Macher, on September 2, 2005 (file on the merits, reparations and costs, Volume II, pages 520 to 548). 19 Cf. Case of Barrios-Altos. Judgment of March 14, 2001. Series C No. 75, para. 2, and Cf. Case of Barrios-Altos. Interpretation of the Judgment on the Merits. (Art. 67 of the American Convention on Human Rights). Judgment of September 3, 2001. Series C No. 83, paras. 41 to 44. 20 Paragraphs 54.8 to 54.20 and 54.28 to 54.31 of the instant Judgment are undisputed facts, which this Court holds to be established on the basis of the acknowledgement of responsibility carried out by the State.