16 and Margarita Mateo-Bullón, and ordered that the case be remitted to the ordinary jurisdiction, where they were to be tried for terrorism. Based on this judgment, the new writ of habeas corpus was declared inadmissible. The extraordinary motion for review presented by the Deputy General Prosecutor, which provided the grounds for the review of the judgment of August 11, 1993, by said Council was illegal; the reasons put forth in same were not admissible as such under the Code of Military Justice, since this case involved a person who had been acquitted and a judgment that could not be reviewed. In October 1996, a request for a pardon was presented on behalf of Luis Alberto Cantoral-Benavides because it was the only means of obtaining his immediate release, even though he and his mother, initially, refused to go along with the request. The case was presented to the ad hoc Commission created in August 1996. After a thorough investigation, he was granted a pardon in June 1997. It was very difficult to defend persons being investigated or tried for the crimes of terrorism or treason against the fatherland since they were held incommunicado from the time of their arrest. It was difficult to gain access to the files, especially in the military courts, and to interview clients. Many people did not have a defense attorney while on trial, and could not exercise their rights fully. g. Testimony of Elba Greta Minaya-Calle, former criminal judge of the First Investigation Court of Lima at the time of the events in question. On September 16, 1993, she was serving as Criminal Judge of the First Investigation Court of Lima, and had jurisdiction to receive writs of habeas corpus. According to the law, criminal judges were not restricted in any way from entering any place they needed to visit, including military facilities, where, at the time, certain restrictions had been imposed by the military in violation of the law. She was made aware of a writ of habeas corpus interposed on behalf of Pedro Telmo Vega-Valle, Luis Guzmán-Casas and Luis Fernando Cantoral-Benavides on the grounds that they had been arrested arbitrarily; the writ was not executed properly at the Rospigilosi Castle and she had difficulty gaining access to the visitors register. Later, the Supreme Council of Military Justice gave her a copy of the judgment of August 11, 1993, in which she learned, among other things, that Luis Alberto Cantoral-Benavides had been acquitted. However, since he was not named in the writ in question, she could not issue an opinion on the matter. She declared the writ inadmissible in accordance with Article 6(2) of the Law on Habeas Corpus, considering that the arrest had been properly ordered and had not been arbitrary. Later, she found out that there had been a judicial error on the part of the naval judge in charge of imposing sentences; he ordered the release of three persons who had actually been convicted, and left three that had been acquitted behind bars. She has experienced difficulty in submitting writs of habeas corpus to the military courts; for example, difficulties in entering military facilities. She has been harassed and threatened for attempting to administer justice. In August 1997, after she gave testimony before the Inter-American Court, the Ministry of the Interior ordered that