“persons suspected or accused of having committed war crimes, or who have been convicted of this” cannot be covered by an amnesty.462 Consequently, it may be understood that article 6(5) of Additional Protocol II refers to extensive amnesties in relation to those who have taken part in the non-international armed conflict or who are deprived of liberty for reasons related to the armed conflict, provided that this does not involve facts, such as those of the instant case, that can be categorized as war crimes,463 and even crimes against humanity.464 287. The negotiations under the good offices of the Secretary-General of the United Nations and the agreements reached by the parties to the Salvadoran armed conflict – the Government of the Republic of El Salvador and the Farabundo Martí National Liberation Front – in the process conducted in order “to terminate the armed conflict using political means as soon as possible, to promote the democratization of the country, to guarantee absolute respect for human rights, and to reunify Salvadoran society,” converge in the signature, on January 16, 1992, of a Peace Accord that ended the hostilities.465 This Accord made no mention of amnesty, but established clearly in its Chapter I (“Armed Forces”) section 5, a paragraph entitled “End to impunity,”466 which establishes the following: The Parties recognize the need to clarify and put an end to any indication of impunity on the part of officers of the armed forces, particularly in cases where respect for human rights is jeopardized. To that end, the Parties refer this issue to the Commission on the Truth for consideration and resolution. All of this shall be without prejudice to the principle, which the Parties also recognize, that acts of this nature, regardless of the sector to which their perpetrators belong, must be the object of exemplary action by the law courts so that the punishment prescribed by law is meted out to those found responsible. 467 288. The foregoing leads to the conclusion that the logic of the political process between the parties in conflict, which resulted in the end of the hostilities in El Salvador, imposed on the State the obligation to investigate and punish by the “exemplary action” of the ordinary law courts, at least the grave human rights violations established by the Truth Commission, so that they did not remain unpunished and to avoid their repetition. 289. Subsequently, the Legislative Assembly of the Republic of El Salvador enacted the 1992 National Reconciliation Law, which established the benefit of unrestricted amnesty, while excluding from its application “anyone who, according to the report of the Truth Commission, had taken part in grave acts of violence that had occurred since January 1, 1980, whose impact Such amnesties would also be incompatible with the rule obliging States to investigate and prosecute persons suspected of having committed war crimes in non-international armed conflicts.” [citations omitted]. Cf. International Committee of the Red Cross, Customary International Humanitarian Law, vol. I, edited by Jean-Marie Henckaerts and Louise DoswaldBeck, 2007, pp. 691 and 692. 462 This rule of international humanitarian law and interpretation of Additional Protocol II, Article 6(5) has been referred to by the Human Rights Committee of the United Nations. Cf. inter alia, H.R.C., Concluding Observations of the Human Rights Committee: Lebanon U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/79/Add.78, 5 May 1997, para. 12, and Concluding Observations of the Human Rights Committee: Croatia, U.N. Doc., CCPR/ CO/71/HRV, 4 April 2001, para. 11. 463 The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court defines war crimes as violence against person or property, in particular murder of all kinds, cruel treatment and torture, outrages upon personal dignity, and extrajudicial executions in Article 8, paragraph 2, subparagraph (c), i) ii) and iv), and in subparagraph (e) i) and vi) of this Statute, intentional attacks against the civilian population and rape. 464 The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court defines crimes against humanity as acts of murder, extermination, torture and rape, committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population with knowledge of the attack, in Article 7, paragraphs (a), (b), (f) and (g). 465 Cf. United Nations. El Salvador Agreements: on the road to peace, 1992 (evidence file, tome IX, annex 6 to the pleadings and motions brief, folios 5805 and 5858). 466 Added to this, the Court bears in mind that already, in the San José Agreement of July 26, 1990, the parties that were negotiating agreed that “[a]ll necessary actions and measures would be taken immediately to avoid any type of acts or practices against the life, integrity, security and liberty of persons, [as well as] to eradicate any practice of disappearances and kidnappings, [and that p]riority w[ould] be given to the investigation of any cases of this nature that might arise, as well as to the identification and punishment of those found guilty.” United Nations. El Salvador Agreements: on the road to peace, 1992 (evidence file, tome IX, annex 6 to the pleadings and motions brief, folio 5818). 467 United Nations. El Salvador Agreements: on the road to peace, 1992 (evidence file, tome IX, annex 6 to the pleadings and motions brief, folio 5865). 95