20 JECOTE PNP Huánuco, by the name of Edwar Elí Nación Ramos, who was the common-law husband of one of the two women. They claimed that he was being held unlawfully. From their references to the armed conflict, to the contemptible authorities, I inferred that they were terrorists. Then they mentioned legal advice to Edwar Elí Nación Ramos “(c) Beto” and asked that I advise his son. I hereby declare that the persons who appeared in my office went by the name of “c Yersi”, “c Lida” and “c Guillermo.” They did not assign me a pseudonym and they did not assign me any position or post. 3. As for his truthful confession of the terrorist acts in which he participated, he said the following: I hereby state that when the terrorist criminals came to my office to retain my services to advise (c) “Beto” they knew every detail of my personal life; they knew where my family lived in Lima, and were aware of my professional activities. They knew that I lived alone in this city, they knew all my movements. This shocked me and terrified me, which is how they managed to threaten me into collaborating in the following events: FIRST. Advising Edward Elí Nación Ramos (c) “Beto” for purposes of his statement to the JECOTE- Huánuco, the Public Prosecutor’s Office and the Huánuco Criminal Presiding Judge, and advising him during his preliminary hearing and during the search of his residence. I was unable to continue representing him because I had to be away from this city; for family and work-related reasons, I had to be in Lima. I was always trying to avoid the surreptitious involvement in his legal defense because I feared for my life. When I ceased advising him, I lost track of the legal situation of (c) “Beto” and his fate; it was his mother who kept coming to my office but didn’t find me there because I was in Lima. SECOND: At the time they were forcing me to defend (c) “Beto”, they told me that they wanted me to represent a terrorist criminal in Tingo María, whose name and pseudonym I don’t know. At the end of one week, however, they told me that my defense services were no longer needed as it was no longer necessary. I would like to point out and make very clear that I have come here voluntarily with regard to the first question asked of me; I have volunteered my repentance with regard to the legal assistance I provided to the terrorist criminals; however, I am not confessing to activism in the PCP-Sendero Luminoso organization, as I never had any post, rank or even a pseudonym within the organization known as the Peruvian 49 Communist Party-Sendero Luminoso.. 92. The Commission notes that the Declaration is signed by the above-named authorities and by the applicant, whose name is illegible; his fingerprint is not on the statement, even though a fingerprint was reqired under Article 11(f) of the Regulations governing the Repentance Law. 93. The Commission observes that the petitioner has contested the validity of the above Declaration, at the domestic level since December 1994, and throughout the processing of his case before the IACHR. He asserts that the statement that JECOTE and DINCOTE-Lima took from him in the presence of the Deputy Prosecutor was deliberately misplaced, as it contained the invoices for the professional fees that Mr. Galindo issued when he practiced law. Those invoices were seized at his residence, as recorded in the Search Record attached to his 50 statement and would prove that he was not a member of the Association of Democratic Lawyers. The petitioner observes that in his deposition, he stated that his statement could not be construed as a “declaration of 51 repentance” as he was not part of any terrorist group. The Commission notes that the page that reads “From the Declaration given by Luís Antonio Galindo Cárdenas”, which the petitioner attached and which the authorities 49 Annex 32. Applicant’s Declaration of October 15, 1995. Attachment to the State’s brief of October 17, 2008. 50 See Annex 19. Brief addressed to the Office of the Huánuco First Provincial Criminal Prosecutor, Dr. Ricardo Robles y Coz, dated December 7, 1994, received at the Secretariat of the Huánuco Public Prosecutor’s Office on December 13, 1994. Annex to the petitioner’s brief of January 3, 1996; see also Annex 23. Amplification of the complaint filed by Mr. Galindo on January 18, 1995, with the Office of the Attorney General of the Nation; and Annex 20. Brief addressed to the President of the Board of Supreme Prosecutors of the Public Prosecutor’s Office, stamped ‘received’ by the Office of the Attorney General of the Nation on January 16, 1995. Attachments to the petitioner’s brief of January 3, 1996. 51 Annex 24. Page six of the deposition by Luis Antonio Galindo Cárdenas (46), signed by the examiner, Public Prosecutor’s Office, Dr. Víctor Aguirre Visag, the attorney-deponent, Luis A. Galindo Cárdenas. Attached to the petitioner’s brief of January 3, 1996.