71 proceeding returned to the judge of first instance so as to initiate the procedural instruction in compliance with the judgment of October 1993 of the Federal Regional Court. The judge of first instance required the State to send the report on the Guerrilha do Araguaia.263 On November 11, 1998, the State presented another remedy. 264 ii. Facts subsequent to the ratione temporis jurisdiction of the Court 191. On February 21, 2000, the Federal Regional Court dismissed the abovementioned remedy.265 On April 25, 2000, the Brazilian Army submitted a document to the Union, which was incorporated in the case file of the Ordinary Action,, wherein it was affirmed that “there are no documents or any other information to be presented to [the] authorities, at this moment [and] that [on the] 11th of [November, 1982], the then Cabinet of the Army clarified that the documents had been previously offered to the Office of the Regional Prosecutor General of the Republic.”266 In June of 2003, the First Federal Court finally analyzed the merits of the case and ruled the action was in order. As such, it ordered the declassification and presentation of all information related to the military operations against the Guerrilha do Araguaia, and to report on the places where in the disappeared were buried, among other measures.267 In August of 2003, the Union appealed said decision.268 The Federal Regional Tribunal rejected the appeal in December of 2004.269 Subsequently, on July 8, 2005, the State filed a Special Remedy and an Extraordinary Remedy.270 The first was declared partially admissible by the Supreme Court of Justice, in what regards the determination of the judicial body charged with executing the judgment of first instance, and the Federal Regional Court did not admit the second.271 On October 263 Cf. Office of the First Federal Court of the Federal District of October 19, 1998 (case file of annexes to the brief of pleadings and motions, tome I, annex 3, folio 3899). 264 Cf. Tort Action filed by the Union on November 11, 1998 (case file of annexes to the application, tome I, annex 17, folios 104 to 112). 265 Cf. Decision of the Tribunal Regional Federal of February 22, 2000 in the Tort Action No. 1998.01.00.084211-3. Also available at: http://www.trf1.jus.br/Processos/ProcessosTRF/; last visited on October 8, 2010. 266 Cf. Order No. 723/A2 of the Cabinet Chief of the Major of the Army of April 25, 2000 (case file of annexes to the brief of pleadings and motions, tome I, folio 3900). 267 Cf. Judgment of First Federal Court of June 30, 2003 (case file of annexes to the application, tome I, annex 21, folios 134 to 180). 268 Cf. Motion for partial appeal filed by the Union on August 27, 2003 (case file of annexes to the application, tome I, annex 22, folios 181 to 201). 269 Cf. Decision of the Tribunal Regional Federal on the appeal filed by the Union, published on December 14, 2004 (case file of annexes to the application, tome I, annex 23, folios 202 to 261). Also available at http://www.trf1.jus.br/Processos/ProcessosTRF/; last visited on October 8, 2010. 270 Cf. Special Remedy of the Union filed on July 8, 2005 (case file of annexes to the application, tome I, annex 24, folios 262 to 273), and Extraordinary Remedy of the Union filed on July 8, 2005 (case file of annexes to the brief of pleadings and motions, tome I, annex 15, folios 4027 to 4035). 271 Cf. Judgment of the Superior Tribunal of Justice published on September 20, 2007 (case file of annexes to the application, tome I, annex 25, folios 274 a 282). Also available at: http://www.stj.jus.br; last visited on October 8, 2010, and Decision of the Tribunal Regional Federal of March 16, 2006 (case file of annexes to the brief of pleadings and motions, tome I, annex 16, folios 4039 to 4041).