E/CN.4/1999/63/Add.2 page 16 (ii) Incommunicado detention 76. A person can be held incommunicado in police custody with the knowledge of, but without an order from or the authorization of, the Office of the Public Prosecutor and a judge. The law limits this power to cases where “the circumstances and the complexity of investigations make it necessary”, but all the interviewees stated that they had been subjected to incommunicado detention in police premises. None of them stated that they had received a visit from a lawyer while being held incommunicado. Fortunately, Act No. 26.447 of 20 April 1995 recognized that a person being held incommunicado has the right to speak with a lawyer. 77. It was said that prosecutors usually do not analyse the evidence collected by DINCOTE or the Armed Forces and limit themselves to reproducing the sworn statement, which will later become the basis of the accusation and subsequently of the sentence. (iii) Examination proceedings 78. The examination is the investigation carried out by the judge. On receipt of the charge from the prosecutor, the judge initiates investigations which must be completed within 30 days, extendable for another 20 days if there are many persons accused or if it has not been possible to gather substantial evidence. Recently, it has been understood, with good reason, that the prosecutor is free to decide whether or not to bring charges. 79. Originally, article 13 (a) of Act No. 25.475 provided, in cases of the offences of terrorism and treason, that “without any exceptions, no type of release is appropriate”. This severity was partially tempered by Act No. 26.248, which allowed unconditional release once the innocence of the person was established. Even in this case, however, release does not take place until it is approved by the High Court. 80. The most serious situation is that which the person deprived of liberty faces at the beginning of the examination. The judge may order an investigation if he considers it proven that an offence was committed, even if he is convinced that the person arrested by the police is not responsible for the offence. The law rules out the possibility of releasing the person, since it provides that “the judge shall issue the order for the start of the investigation by issuing an arrest warrant”. It is, therefore, the police that, de facto decides the defendant's fate. This has been one of the phenomenon of “innocent prisoners” who have not been brought to trial (see chap. VII). 81. Once the examination has ended, the Office of the Public Prosecutor issues a legal opinion with its recommendations, after which the judge draws up a report stating whether the accused is innocent or guilty. There have been cases in which the prosecutor considers that the accused is innocent, but nevertheless brings charges (for example, in the case against José Luis Gutiérrez Vivanco, in the Lima High Court).