90. On August 28, 2002, through Resolution No. 415-2002-CNM, the CNM, through an unsubstantiated decision, declared his non-ratification and canceled his corresponding appointment and title. 76 91. On September 12, 2002, the Fiftieth Civil Court of Lima declared the writ of amparo unfounded, considering that the norms of the 1993 Constitution, regarding the evaluation and ratification of magistrates, have immediate application to them if they performed said role at that time. 77 On September 24, 2002, Mr. Valenzuela Cerna filed an appeal, in which he alleged that a less favorable rule was retroactively applied to him, since under the validity of the 1979 Constitution in Article 242(2) he was “guaranteed, as Magistrate, tenure in service until seventy years of age.” 78 On May 23, 2003, the Fifth Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice of Lima declared the appeal inadmissible, indicating the origin of the principle of immediate application of the Law enshrined in the first paragraph of the third article of the Civil Code that prescribes that the law applies “to the consequences of existing legal relationships and situations,” since the 1993 Constitution was in force on May 30, 2002. Therefore, they confirmed the judgment of September 12, 2002. 79 92. On July 16, 2003, the alleged victim filed an extraordinary appeal before the Second Chamber of the Constitutional Court, alleging the improper retroactive application of the 1993 Constitution. 80 On January 9, 2004, the Second Chamber of the Constitutional Court declared the appeal unfounded, arguing that, since the 1993 Constitution came into force, it regulates the legal situation of the public authorities and officials, with the obvious inclusion of the Judiciary and the Public Prosecution Service. The Constitutional Court considered that, in principle, “the fact that the CNM has submitted the appellant to the evaluation and ratification process does not result in a violation of the alleged constitutional right, since he completed his 7 years in office, and therefore, the expectation of continuing to in the position depended on his being ratified, which is outside the scope of what is constitutionally protected by subsection (3) of Article 146 of the Constitution.” 81 93. On March 30, 2004, Mr. Valenzuela Cerna filed an appeal for annulment with the President of the Constitutional Court. 82 On May 14, 2004, said court denied the appeal because it found that there was no procedural defect and that it had followed its line of case law regarding the ratification of magistrates. 83 B.3 Regarding Jean Aubert Díaz Alvarado 94. Mr. Jean Díaz was appointed as Deputy Provincial Prosecutor to the Huancayo Combined Provincial Prosecutor's Office of the Junín Judicial District on May 24, 1989 84, under the 1979 Constitution. For the evaluation procedure, the Regulations for the Evaluation and Ratification 76 Resolution No. 415-2002-CNM issued by the National Council of the Judiciary on August 28, 2002 (evidence file, f. 1798). 77 Cf. Judgment of the Fiftieth Civil Court of Lima, order No. 6 issued in file No. 2002-26316-0-100-JCl-50º, on September 12, 2002 (evidence file, pages 1818 to 1824). 78 Cf. Appeal filed by Mr. Valenzuela Cerna on September 24, 2002 (evidence file, pages 1826 to 1831). 79 Cf. Judgment of the Fifth Civil Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice of Lima, Resolution No. 11 issued, in file No. 2857-2002, of May 23, 2002 (evidence file, pages 1832 to 1835). 80 Cf. Extraordinary appeal filed by Mr. Valenzuela Cerna on July 16, 2003 (evidence file, pages 1837 to 1841). 81 Cf. Judgment of the Second Chamber of the Constitutional Court issued, in file No. 1892-2003-AA/TC, of January 9, 2004 (evidence file, fs. 2800 to 2802). 82 Cf. Motion for annulment filed by Mr. Valenzuela Cerna on March 30, 2004 (evidence file, pages 1858 to 1862). 83 Cf. Order of the Constitutional Court issued, in file No. 1892-2003 AA/TC, of May 14, 2004 (evidence file, f. 1864). 84 Cf. Supreme Order No. 115-89 JUS of May 24, 1989 (evidence file, f. 88). 25