32 Irregularities have been determined in the evaluation and selection of personnel in 1992 [… during which] the minimum number of points indicated in the Rules for the Competitive Examination was not respected [… and,] in many cases, the classification obtained by the candidates in the qualifying examination was not respected. […] The former employees who collected their social benefits and those who also availed themselves of incentives for voluntary termination accepted their dismissal, according to repeated acts of a labor-related nature. […] Pursuant to the [Peruvian] laws in force, the Special Committee has abstained from examining any claim that is before a judicial instance, in either the domestic or the supranational sphere.58 Specifically, with regard to the dismissed employees involved in the proceedings before the Inter-American Commission, the Special Committee stated that: Since this matter was being decided by a supranational instance, under the laws in force, it was unable to rule on it; particularly since a group of the said former employees have formally requested the international organ to rule on the merits; hence, it abstained from issuing an opinion in this regard. [Moreover, it should not be overlooked that the 257 former employees were the only ones who exhausted the judicial proceedings.59 In other words, the 257 alleged victims in this case were not included in the hypotheses for the application of these supreme decrees. 89(34) Act No. 27586 of November 22, 2001, published on December 12, 2001, established that the latest date for the Special Committees to conclude their final reports was December 20, 2001 (supra para. 89(33)). The Act also created a Multisectoral Commission composed of the Ministers of Economy and Finance, Labor and Social Promotion, the Presidency, Health, and Education, as well as by four representatives of the provincial municipalities and by the Ombudsman, or their respective representatives. This Multisectoral Commission would be: […] responsible for evaluating the viability of the suggestions and recommendations of the Special Committees of the entities included within the sphere of Act No. 27487, and also for establishing measures to be implemented by the heads of the entities and for the adoption of supreme decrees or the elaboration of draft laws, taking into consideration criteria relating to administrative efficiency, job promotion, and reincorporation in the affected sectors; if necessary, it would be able to propose reinstatement, and also the possibility of a special early pension regime. […] The said Multisectoral Commission may, also, review the reasons for the dismissals and determine the cases in which the payment of earned or pending remuneration or social benefits is owing, provided these aspects have not been the object of legal action.60 89(35) On March 26, 2002, the Multisectoral Commission issued its final report, concluding, inter alia, that “the norms that regulated the collective dismissals should not be questioned […], merely the procedures by which they were implemented.” It also agreed “that any recommendation on reincorporation or reinstatement should 58 Cf. Report No. 002-2001-CERCC/CR of the Special Committee responsible for reviewing the collective dismissal of the congressional employees under Act No. 27487 (file of appendixes to the application, appendix 4, tome 3, Vol. II, folios 2187, 2240 to 2247). 59 Cf. Report No. 002-2001-CERCC/CR of the Special Committee responsible for reviewing the collective dismissal of the congressional employees under Act No. 27487 (file of appendixes to the application, appendix 4, tome 3, Vol. II, folio 2227). 60 Cf. Act No. 27586, published on December 12, 2001 (file of appendixes to the application, Appendix 4, tome 4, folio 2650).