28 84. On June 13, 1997, Gustavo Cesti Hurtado was transferred to the Military Hospital and on June 16 that year he requested to be transferred to the San Lucas Clinic. 85. On October 30, 1997, Gustavo Cesti Hurtado requested that a private doctor should be authorized to enter the prison installations where he was imprisoned; the request was refused on November 5 that year. 86. On December 4, 1997, the President of the Human Rights Committee of the Bar Association of Lima and the President of the Human Rights Committee of the Doctors’ Association of Peru went to the Simon Bolivar Barracks in order to visit Gustavo Cesti Hurtado. However, the military authorities did not allow them to see him. 87. At the date of this judgment, the alleged victim continues imprisoned in the Simón Bolívar Barracks, Pueblo Libre District, Lima. F. The complaint against the members of the Public Law Chamber 88. On March 7, 1997, the Prosecutor General of the military justice system accused the members of the Public Law Chamber who had declared habeas corpus admissible, of prevarication and of usurpation of functions, which is an offense against the public administration, before the Office of the Attorney General. 89. On July 15, 1997, the Senior Prosecutor responsible for the Office of the Supreme Prosecutor for Internal Control in the Office of the Attorney General declared the complaint against the members of the Public Law Chamber without merit; this was confirmed by the Executive Committee of the Office of the Attorney General on September 3, 1997. 90. On July 25, 1997, the Supervisory Office for Judges of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Republic imposed a disciplinary sanction on the members of the Public Law Chamber as it considered that, by ordering that the proceeding under the military justice system should be suspended, the said judges had exceeded their functions and incurred in negligence in the performance of their duties. Moreover, this decision declared that the decision of the Chamber should have resolved – solely and exclusively – that matters should revert to the situation before the violation or, in this specific case, the threat of violation of the personal liberty of the citizen, Gustavo Adolfo Cesti Hurtado; that is, it should have ordered that the warrant of arrest against him should be lifted as well as the impediment to leave national territory. However, it made clear that it did not challenge the judicial decision for which the judges were penalized: the jurisdictional nature of judicial decisions make them inviolable, as they may only be modified by another judicial decision, through the appropriate legal channels, and their functional nature makes the trial judge subject to civil and/or criminal disciplinary responsibility for negligence or fraud in violation of our legal code, and the sanction or penalty imposed does not, in any way, modify the effects of the defective judicial decision. G. The complaint against the members of the Supreme Council of Military Justice