23 Judicial Circuit for Vargas State). The Sala Constitucional del Tribunal Supremo de Justicia (Constitucional Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice) dismissed the action for review on January 24, 2002 on the grounds that the habeas corpus was not the “effective means to locate, as it is necessary to do, a person who has[,] allegedly[,] illegally or illegitimately disappeared.” 51.11 On September 14, 2001, Oswaldo José Domínguez-Florido, Thirtieth Prosecutor for the Attorney General’s Office with Full Nationwide Jurisdiction, and Irma Pazos de Fuenmayor and Raquel del Rocío Gasperi-Arellano, Forty-fifth and Seventy-fourth prosecutors, respectively, for the Attorney General’s Office of the Metropolitan Area of Caracas filed a complaint with the Juez de Primera Instancia en Funciones de Control de la Circunscripción Judicial Penal del Estado Vargas (Control Court of First Instance of the Criminal Judicial Circuit for Vargas State) against Messrs. Casimiro José Yanes and Justiniano de Jesús Martínez-Carreño, DISIP officers, for the forced disappearance of persons, to the detriment of Messrs. Oscar José Blanco-Romero and Marco Antonio Monasterio-Pérez. 51.12 On September 6, 2002 the Juzgado Quinto de Primera Instancia (Fifth Court of First Instance), among other things, dismissed the action against Messrs. Casimiro José Yanes and Justiniano de Jesús Martínez-Carreño. In its decision, the Juzgado Quinto (Fifth Court) ruled that the evidence of the lineup identification performed during the investigation was inadmissible because it had been conducted in violation of the right to a fair trial of the accused. In addition, the Court dismissed the complaint because of formal defects, allowing the prosecutors to file an amended complaint, curing said defects, for the dismissal was without prejudice. 51.13 On September 12 and 13, 2002 respectively, the Thirtieth Prosecutor for the Attorney General’s Office with Full National Jurisdiction, and the Forty-fifth and Seventy-fourth prosecutors for the Attorney General’s Office of the Metropolitan Area of Caracas, as well as the representatives of the victims appealed the dismissal by the Tribunal Quinto de Primera Instancia (Fifth Court of First Instance). On October 17, 2002, the Corte de Apelaciones del Circuito Judicial Penal de la Circunscripción Judicial del Estado Vargas (Court of Appeals of the Criminal Judicial Circuit of the Judicial District for Vargas State) “[d]ismissed the action for review […] as regards the dismissal of the complaint filed by the prosecution” and [r]everse[d] the decision by the Juzgado Quinto (Fifth Court)[,…] declaring the lineup identification procedures null and void.” 51.14 On February 25, 2003, the Thirtieth Prosecutor for the Attorney General’s Office with Full National Jurisdiction filed an amparo (remedy for the protection of constitutional rights) with the Sala Constitucional del Tribunal Supremo de Justicia (Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice) against the decisions handed down by the Juzgado Quinto de Primera Instancia (Fifth Court of First Instance) and the Corte de Apelaciones (Court of Appeals). The representatives of the victim and of his next of kin filed a petition on February 26, 2003 for a joinder to such action. On February 11, 2004, the Sala Constitucional (Constitutional Chamber) dismissed the amparo (remedy for the protection of constitutional rights). 51.15 On May 11, 2004, the Thirtieth Prosecutor for the Attorney General’s Office with Full National Jurisdiction, and the Forty-fifth and Seventy-fourth prosecutors for the Attorney General’s Office of the Metropolitan Area of Caracas filed a complaint against Messrs. Casimiro José Yánez and Justiniano de Jesús Martínez-Carreño, charging them as a perpetrator and as an accessory, respectively, with the crime of