E/CN.4/1999/63/Add.2 page 12 academic freedom, which is simply one manifestation of freedom of opinion and expression. In this case, moreover, the trial is held in the military courts and the maximum penalty is life imprisonment. Under Act No. 26.508 of 20 July 1995 any beneficiary of the Repentance Act who commits a terrorist offence is guilty of treason. 4. Extension of the concept of terrorism to ordinary offences 55. Legislative Decree No. 895 of 1998, enacted to “combat organized crime by armed groups”, punishes as a perpetrator of “aggravated terrorism” (even if it is an ordinary offence) any member or accomplice of a criminal group who carries firearms or explosives to commit any offence against life, physical integrity, health, property, individual freedom or public security, even if the perpetrator acts alone. The maximum penalty is life imprisonment. The Working Group believes that this is yet another violation of the principle of legality. B. 1. Procedural measures to combat terrorism Extension of the jurisdiction of the military courts 56. The 1979 Constitution provided that military courts could try civilians only in the case of evasion of compulsory military service and treason during a war with another country. This important limitation was brought to an end with laws subsequent to 5 April 1992. Article 4 of Act No. 25.659 states that certain offences, such as treason, which are committed by civilians and in which no exclusively military interest is at stake may be transferred to military courts. 57. Article 173 of the 1993 Constitution goes even further, since it allows military courts to try the offences of “terrorism determined by the law”, a law which has not yet been enacted, so that they continue to be within the jurisdiction of the civil courts. 58. Decree-Law No. 25.659 of 1992 also established a procedure, but Decree-Law No. 25.708 provided that summary proceedings would apply to trials “in the theatre of operations”. 59. There are six areas of military justice. At the first level are the judges (around 30) who conduct the investigations and hand down sentences, of whom 50 per cent are military lawyers, according to the President of the Supreme Council of Military Justice (CSJM), General Guevara. At the second level are the courts-martial, made up of three military judges, one of whom is a lawyer. The highest level is the Supreme Council of Military Justice, which is composed of eight judges, an auditor and a public prosecutor, which functions in Chambers with five members, three of them lawyers. 60. Conflicts of jurisdiction between civil and military courts are settled by the Supreme Court (art. 141 of the Constitution). This is the only area where the civil courts have pre-eminence over military courts since the other case provided for is an appeal on cassation in the event of the death penalty for treason in wartime, which is not applicable.