47 proceedings against Urcesino Ramírez-Rojas et al., for the crime of theft to the detriment of the State. 97(83) On September 30, 1994, after holding private hearings and having received the parties’ conclusions of fact and of law, the Special Criminal Chamber for Terrorism of the Superior Court of Justice of Lima (Sala Penal Especializada de Terrorismo de la Corte Superior de Justicia de Lima), composed of “faceless” judges, sentenced Urcesino Ramírez-Rojas et al., to twenty-five years’ imprisonment for the crime of terrorism to the detriment of the State and various persons, pursuant to the provisions of Article 320 of the Criminal Code in force as of 1991, for a series of illegal acts committed in 1987, 1988, 1989, and 1990. The judgment was rendered based on the information and evidence contained in Police Report No. 153 of August 8, 1991, and in Police Report No. 175 of September 16, 1991. The Special Criminal Chamber for Terrorism dismissed the innocence claims of Urcesino Ramírez-Rojas, and sustained the “insufficiency of said allegations […] as they we[re] not supported by any other evidence which prov[ed] his innocence.” 97(84) On September 30, 1994, Urcesino Ramírez-Rojas’ legal counsel filed a petition for annulment before the Special Criminal Chamber for Terrorism of the Superior Court of Justice of Lima. 97(85) On August 8, 1995, after hearing the arguments of the alleged victim’s legal counsel, the Supreme Court of Justice of Peru (Corte Suprema de Justicia de Perú), composed of “faceless” judges, rejected the motion for annulment of the judgment rendered on September 30, 1994, convicting Urcesino Ramírez-Rojas et al. for the crime of terrorism against the State. Moreover, the aforementioned Court annulled the part of the judgment whereby Urcesino Ramírez-Rojas et al. were convicted for the crime of terrorism against several individuals, holding that “as regards crimes of terrorism, the injured party is the State exclusively.” 97(86) On January 10, 1996, Urcesino Ramírez-Rojas filed a motion for review before the Administrative Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice (Sala Administrativa de la Corte Suprema de Justicia) regarding the judgment rendered on August 8, 1995. Said motion was decided three years and seven months later, on August 24, 1999, when it was dismissed. Regarding the annulment of the first proceedings and new proceedings against Urcesino Ramírez-Rojas. 97(87) On September 19, 2002, the Seventh Criminal Court of Lima (Séptimo Juzgado Penal de Lima) ruled favorably on the writ of habeas corpus filed on behalf of the alleged victim by his brother, Pedro Ramírez-Rojas. The judgment set forth that the proceedings carried out against Urcesino Ramírez-Rojas had violated his right to be heard by a competent judge and, consequently, his individual freedom.86 86 Cf. Judgment rendered by the Seventh Criminal Court of Lima (Séptimo Juzgado Penal de Lima) on September 19, 2002, File 18-02 RDT-HC (case file of exhibits to the application, volume 1, appendix 45, pages 336 to 338).