E/CN.4/1999/63/Add.2 page 28 12. The right not to be tried twice for the same offence (non bis in idem) 150. The principle of non bis in idem, which is provided for in article 14, paragraph 7, of the Covenant, may be violated as a result of: (a) the assignment of cases to the inappropriate court by the police (para. 51); and (b) the reopening of cases in which the accused has been tried and acquitted (paragraph 57 of the report of the Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers). This view is shared by the Working Group. VII. “INNOCENT PRISONERS”, THE LAW OF PARDONS AND THE AD HOC COMMITTEE 151. The most serious consequence of the violation of guarantees of due process, which was referred to in all the interviews, is that of the so-called “innocent prisoners”. 152. The Working Group noted that judges pretend too often to have no knowledge of the methods used by the terrorist groups Shining Path and MRTA (Tupac Amaru Revolutionary Movement) to recruit occasional or permanent collaborators for their crimes. The unfortunate person thus selected has no way of standing up to his abductors; he can only obey or die. Judgements are usually unconcerned with a person's guilt or innocence and are simply a kind of check as to whether the offence is provided for by law; if it is, then the person is convicted. 153. Usually, the accused has no way of proving how he was recruited or that he was subjected to coercion or physical or moral violence. As a non-member of the group with no military training, no knowledge of underground organizations and no one to protect him, he can easily be arrested, tried and convicted in the above-mentioned conditions. Many were convicted on the basis of testimony by “repenters”. The only persons they could legally confront, i.e. their abductors or the repenter who turned them in, are prohibited from appearing in court. 154. This is the issue of the “innocent prisoners”, a term widely used in Peru. Many are innocent in a formal and material sense: they did not commit the acts of which they were convicted. To date, they have been the only beneficiaries of presidential pardons. 155. There are, however, others who found themselves in the typical situation of having transported a subversive, fed him, lodged him or treated his injuries, but this is not enough to make a person a criminal and sentence him to life imprisonment. Criminal law requires wrongful criminal conduct. The Peruvian Penal Code provides that acting “out of unsurmountable fear of equal or greater harm” is a ground for exemption from responsibility (art. 20, para. 7), but this provision is not enforced by the courts. 156. “They kidnapped me and took me to the woods where they indoctrinated me; after a few days they asked me to come with them; I would drive the vehicle since I knew how to drive. They took me to a house, where a young girl got in. I took them where they ordered me to; they put her out of the vehicle and