ORDER OF THE INTER-AMERICAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS * OF NOVEMBER 26, 2013 CASE OF CESTI HURTADO v. PERU MONITORING OF COMPLIANCE WITH THE JUDGMENT HAVING SEEN: 1. The Judgment on preliminary objections ordered by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (hereinafter “the Inter-American Court,” “the Court” or “the Tribunal”) on January 26, 1999, the Judgment on the merits ordered by the Court on September 29, 1999, (hereinafter “the Judgment on the merits”), the Judgment regarding interpretation of the Judgment on the merits issued by the Court on January 29, 2000 (hereinafter “the Judgment regarding interpretation of the Judgment on the merits”), the Judgment on costs and reparations of May 31, 2001 (hereinafter “the Judgment on reparations”), and the Judgment regarding interpretation of the Judgment on costs and reparations ordered by the Court on November 27, 2001, (hereinafter “the Judgment regarding interpretation of the Judgment on reparations”). This case is in regard to the prosecution of Mr. Gustavo Adolfo Cesti Hurtado, a retired military officer at the time, before a military forum where he was arrested, deprived of liberty, and sentenced. This occurred despite the existence of a final order issued in a habeas corpus proceeding, which had ordered that the victim be withdrawn from the military proceeding and that his personal liberty not be violated. The Court, in its Judgment on the merits of September 29, 1999, declared the violation of Articles 7(6) and 25 of the American Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter "the American Convention" or "Convention") in relation to the habeas corpus remedy; 7(1), 7(2) and 7(3) of the Convention in relation to the deprivation of liberty, and 8(1) of the American Convention for having been prosecuted before a court that lacked jurisdiction, all in relation to Articles 1(1) and 2 thereof . 2. The Orders on Monitoring of Compliance issued by the Court on November 17, 2004, September 22, 2006, August 4, 2008, and February 4, 2010. In the latter, the Court held: 1. That it will keep open the procedure to monitor compliance with the obligations not yet fully complied with, specifically: a) annulment of the military proceedings and the effects resulting therefrom (Operative paragraph No. 8 of the Judgment on the merits and Operative paragraphs No. 2 and 3 of the Judgment regarding interpretation of the judgment on the merits;) b) investigation of the facts surrounding this case and punishment of the perpetrators (Operative paragraph No. 5 of the Judgment on reparations;) * The President of the Court, Judge Diego García Sayán, of Peruvian nationality, did not participate in the hearing and deliberation of this Order, pursuant to that provided in Articles 19(2) of the Statute and 19(1) of the Court Rules of Procedure.