37 ii) Measures adopted by the State regarding Decree Law No. 2.191 82(24) To the date of this judgment, six bills of law aimed at amending Decree Law No. 2.191 were submitted. Two of these bills89 proposed an interpretation of the aforementioned decree law through another law, and set forth that the decree should not be enforced regarding crimes against humanity given the impossibility to declare them extinguished and susceptible of amnesty. The third bill90 was aimed at extending the period covered by the Decree Law until March 11, 1990. The fourth bill91 sought to prevent the commencement of proceedings to impose liability upon those individuals mentioned as perpetrators, accomplices or accessories after the fact, “rendering any criminal or civil action related thereto extinguished” and suggested that any pending lawsuits should be definitely dismissed “without further proceedings.” The fifth bill92 was intended to regulate the application of the Decree Law and to establish that, in the case of detained-disappeared persons, the judge should continue investigating “with the sole aim of discovering the location of the victims or their remains.” None of the five bills was passed. The sixth bill93 was recently submitted and its purpose is to declare Decree Law No. 2.191 invalid under public law. The Court ignores the current status of the legislative processing of this bill. 82(25) In the last few years, the Judiciary of Chile has not applied Decree Law No. 2.191 in several cases.94 89 Cf. Bulletin No. 654-07, submitted on April 7, 1992 by senators Rolando Calderón-Aránguiz, Jaime Gazmuri-Mujica, Ricardo Núñez-Muñoz and Hernán Vodanovic-Schnake (record of appendixes to the State’s final written arguments, Appendix 10, folios 4269 to 4274); Bulletin No. 1718-07, submitted on October 11, 1995 by senators Ruiz de Giorgio and Mariano Ruiz-Esquide (record of appendixes to the State’s final written arguments, Appendix 11, folios 4276 to 4285). 90 Cf. Bulletin No. 1.622-07, submitted on June 6, 1995 by Senator Sebastián Piñera-Echenique (record of appendixes to the State’s final written arguments, Appendix 12, folios 4365 to 4371). 91 Cf. Bulletin No. 1632-07, submitted on June 14, 1995 by Senator Francisco Javier Errazuriz (record of appendixes to the State’s final written arguments, Appendix 13, folios 4373 to 4377). 92 Cf. Bulletin No. 1657-07, submitted on July 19, 1995, by Senators Diez, Larraín, Otero, and Piñera (record of appendixes to the State’s final written arguments, Appendix 14, folios 4379 to 4389). 93 Cf. Bulletin No. 4162-07, submitted on April 21, 2006, by Senators Girardi, Letelier, Navarro, and Ruiz-Esquide (Appendix 9, State’s final written arguments, folios 4249 to 4267). 94 Cf. Appeals Court of Santiago, Motion for Appeal No. 38683-94 of September 30, 1994 (record of documents submitted at the Public Hearing, folios 483 to 495); Supreme Court, Motion for Review No. 3831-97 of June 8, 1998 (record of documents submitted at the Public Hearing, folios 186 to 196); Supreme Court, Motion for Review No. 469-98 of September 9, 1998 (record of documents submitted at the Public Hearing, folios 364 to 380); Supreme Court, Motion for Review No. 2097-1998 of December 29, 1998 (record of documents submitted at the Public Hearing, folios 299 to 305); Supreme Court, Motion for Review No. 247-98 of January 7, 1999 (record of documents submitted at the Public Hearing, folios 197 to 206); Supreme Court, Motion for Review No. 1359-2001 of August 26, 2002 (record of documents submitted at the Public Hearing, folios 220 to 234); Supreme Court, Motion for Review No. 4135-2001 of November 29, 2002 (record of documents submitted at the Public Hearing, folios 207 to 219); Supreme Court, Motion for Review No. 4054-2001 of January 31, 2003 (record of documents submitted at the Public Hearing, folios 272 to 283); Supreme Court, Motion for Review No. 4053-2001 of January 31, 2003 (record of documents submitted at the Public Hearing, folios 253 to 271); Supreme Court, Motion for Review No. 4209-01 of March 3, 2003 (record of documents submitted at the Public Hearing, folios 284 to 298); Supreme Court, Motion for Review No. 2231-01 of August 28, 2003 (record of documents submitted at the Public Hearing, folios 235 to 252); Supreme Court, Motion for Review No. 1134-2002 of November 04, 2003 (record of documents submitted at the Public Hearing, folios 306 to 316); Supreme Court, Motion for Review No. 2505-2002 of November 11, 2003 (record of documents submitted at the Public