56 Article 1.- It is recognized that, as a consequence of the logic of events stemming from the agreement between the political parties and the Armed Forces signed in August 1984, and in order to complete the transition to full constitutional order, the State relinquishes the exercise of penal actions with respect to crimes committed until March 1, 1985, by military and police officials either for political reasons or in fulfillment of their functions and in obeying orders from superiors during the de facto period. Article 2. - The abovementioned article does not cover: a) Judicial proceedings in which indictments have been issued at the time this law goes into effect; b) Crimes that may have been committed for personal economic gain or to benefit a third party; Article 3. - For the purposes contemplated in the above articles, the court in pending cases will request the Executive Branch to submit, within a period of thirty days of receiving such request, an opinion as to whether or not it considers the case to fall within the scope of Article 1 of this law. If the Executive Branch considers this law to be applicable, the Court will dismiss the case. If, on the other hand, the Executive Branch does not consider the case to fall under this law, the court will order judicial proceedings to continue. From the time this law is promulgated until the date the court receives a response from the Executive Branch, all pretrial proceedings in cases described in the first paragraph of this article will be suspended. Article 4. - Notwithstanding the abovementioned, the court will remit to the Executive Branch all testimony offered until the date this law is approved, regarding persons allegedly detained in military or police operations who later disappeared, including minors allegedly kidnapped in similar circumstances. The Executive Branch will immediately order the investigation of such incidents. Within a 120-day period from the date of receipt of the judicial communication of the denunciation, the Executive Branch will inform the plaintiffs of the results of these investigations and place at their disposal all information gathered161. 145. Pursuant to the promulgation of the Expiry Law, the Supreme Court of Justice was called to render a decision on the constitutionality of the law, given that attorneys representing victims and relatives of the disappeared filed writs with the                                                                                                                                                                       then reestablished the independence of civil justice and legalized trade unions, political parties, and administrative aspects who had been banned by the military regime. Moreover, he pardoned all persons awaiting trial by military courts and received an overwhelming legislative approval of the Law of National Pacification (Ley de Pacificación Nacional), which pardoned all but 65 of the country’s 800 remaining political prisoners, but contained a provision expressly denying amnesty to members of the military and police force responsible for human rights abuses during the military dictatorship. The political crisis stemming from lawsuits alleging human rights violations committed during the de facto government in Uruguay set the background for the Expiry Law. Regarding the filing of the criminal complaints and the subsequent legal proceedings, military officials refused to appear personally before the civilian courts. According to the Commission, as of 1986, President Sanguinetti “began searching in Parliament for a political solution to the issue of rendition of the military accounts.” Similarly, in the judicial sphere, in November 1986, the Uruguayan Supreme Court upheld the civilian courts’ claim to jurisdiction in two key cases implicating members of the Uruguayan armed forces in disappearances. The decision cleared the way for these cases to proceed in civilian courts and it was expected that the Supreme Court would rule similarly in the remaining cases. On December 1, 1986, President Sanguinetti delivered a public a statement issued by seventeen retired generals who had held top command positions during the military dictatorship, in which they acknowledged and assumed full responsibility for human rights abuses committed by their subordinates during the anti-subversive campaign and indicated that such excesses would not be repeated. Sanguinetti declared that the statement deserved “a response of equal grandeur of spirit.” In order to meet the December 23rd deadline (the same date that several military and police officers were due to appear in civilian court) and to avert what Sanguinetti publicly called “an imminent institutional crisis,” a majority of Colorado and Blanco legislators in both Parliamentary chambers approved Law the Expiry on December 22. 161 Law No. 15.848, supra note 56.