C) The procedure by the military courts to reconstruct the facts. 334. The report on the exercise of reconstruction conducted in June, 2003 as part of the proceedings before the military courts indicates the following: Death of Víctor Salomón PECEROS PEDRAZA and Herma Luz MELENDEZ CUEVA, and the events that occurred in Room ‘I’. The accused—Major HUARCAYA LOVÓN, Captain PAZ RAMOS and Sergeant ALVARADO DÍAZ—were summoned to describe and reiterate the positions, movements and events in the room tagged “I” of the residence from the moment the next-to-last hostage was evacuated, having heard the explanations of the case, this judiciary panel understands that those in room “I” were Major HUARCAYA, on the balcony helping to take the ladder and climb down it to the rescued hostages, and only two remained to be evacuated and were prostrate on the floor […] Sergeant ALVARADO DÍAZ was helping him pick up the next-to-last one (who was, according to his own words, the diplomat Hidetaka OGURA), and Captain PAZ RAMOS led him and turned him over to Major HUARCAYA LOVÓN on the balcony, the hostage climbed down the ladder while Sergeant ALVARADO DÍAZ returned for the final hostage, who went out to the balcony, hesitated, and went back to the closet to remove a package, saying ‘medicine, medicine’ as the next-to-last hostage descended the ladder. The final hostage, an elderly person, was led to the ladder […] and climbed down, and at that moment two MRTA subversives appeared from the hallway, a woman with a grenade and a man with a machine gun, firing at Captain PAZ RAMOS and at Sergeant ALVARADO DÍAZ, and it was evident that, given the position of the two soldiers, their movement as they shot, and the place where they claimed they had seized the two MRTA members, their shots could have hit the two subversives simultaneously and in different parts of the body. 415 D) Conclusions of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission 335. In 2003, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission found as follows: According to the April 14, 2003 opinion of the provincial prosecutor, there are contradictions in the stories given by these military personnel. The opinion says that, under the circumstances in which the final hostage in room ‘I’ was evacuated over the room’s balcony where the ladder had been set up, two terrorists entered the door to the room—a man carrying an UZI machine pistol or an AKM rifle, and a woman carrying a war grenade in her hand, and they responded by shooting at them, causing their death. The prosecutor finds that this narrative does not explain how the two subversives were able to get to the main door to room ‘I’, considering that the contiguous rooms and hallways were under the control of commandos from squads seven and eight. The prosecutor therefore finds plausible the report by Hidetaka Ogura that these two subversives had surrendered. Based on information collected during the investigation by the public prosecutor, it is safe to say that the order to kill the subversives was part of the modus operandi used during the hostage rescue actions.416 336. The report draws the following conclusion about Herma Luz Meléndez Cueva and Víctor Salomón Peceros Pedraza: Procedure of reconstruction of the facts with the replica of the residence of the Japanese ambassador, June 3, 2003 (evidence file, volume XVIII, annex 21 to the State’s answering brief, folios 12074 to 12078). 415 Truth and Reconciliation Commission, Informe Final, 2003, volume VII, chapter 2.66, Extrajudicial executions at the residence of the Japanese ambassador (1997), p. 733 (evidence file, volume I, annex 1 to the case submission brief, folio 19). 416