52 a. The provision of documents and information on individuals and property, facilities, public and private buildings and any other that specifically contributes to or facilitates the activities of terrorist elements or groups. b. The ceding or use of any type of accommodation or other means which could be used to hide individuals or serve as a deposit for weapons, explosives, propaganda, provisions, medicines, and other belongings related to terrorist groups or their victims. c. The intentional transfer of individuals belonging to terrorist groups or linked to their criminal activities, and also the provision of any kind of assistance that helps them escape. d. The organization of courses or the management of centers of indoctrination and training for terrorist groups, operating under any cover. e. The manufacture, acquisition, possession, theft, storage or supply of weapons, ammunition, explosive, asphyxiant, inflammable, toxic or other substances or objects that could cause death or injury. An aggravating circumstance is the possession and hiding of weapons, ammunition or explosives belonging to the Armed Forces and the Peruvian National Police. f. Any form of financial activity, help or mediation carried out voluntarily in order to finance the activities of terrorist elements or groups. a) Relationship between the behavior that Mrs. De La Cruz Flores was charged with in the judgment of November 21, 1996, and article 4 of Decree Law No. 25,475 86. In the instant case, the judgment of November 21, 1996 (supra para. 73(27)) established the following: “[…] regarding physicians whose liability has been proved: even though, as health professionals, they are obliged to use their knowledge in favor of those who need it, without any discrimination, caring for human life and disregarding political and religious beliefs, the charges against them are not merely for having provided their medical expertise to terrorists, because, if this was so, it would not be a crime, but because when a physician presumes or knows the unlawful origin of the injuries caused to an individual, he is obliged to report the fact or advise the authorities so that the latter may conduct the respective investigation; and, in the case of the defendants Guerrero Caballero, María Teresa De la Cruz Flores and Paula Veliz Terry, they are not only charged with having acted as physicians, but that, as such, they were members of the terrorist organization; in other words, their intentional acts were not only guided by compliance with the Hippocratic Oath, because, in addition to treating patients, they were aware that they thereby assisted the organization, performing the tasks with which, as physicians, they had been entrusted, and it is their membership in a subversive group that is punished by the law […]”. 87. The judgment of November 21, 1996, considered that María Teresa De La Cruz Flores had not been charged because she was a physician, “but that, as a physician[...] she was a member of the terrorist organization”; nevertheless, she was only convicted under article 4 of Decree Law No. 25,475. Moreover, during the processing of the case before the Inter-American Court, the State indicated: What is on trial at this time and what [Mrs. De La Cruz Flores] is being investigated for is […] her membership, or that she belongs to, or that as [a physician] she belonged to the terrorist organization, and was aware that she thereby assisted the organization; this is what is being investigated currently by our Judiciary, by its judges specialized in terrorism issues, and for which she may be convicted or […] acquitted, or [it is possible that] the physician could be granted unconditional release; that is the basic issue, not the issue of the medical activity.