commits another serious violation, after having been sanctioned three times with a fine. The suspension is decided by the bodies established in this law. It is without pay and cannot be for more than two months. Article 211. DISMISSAL. Dismissal is imposed by the bodies stipulated in this law, and requires the vote of more than half the total members of the respective body. Dismissal is applicable in the case of a judge who seriously violates judicial responsibility; who has committed a serious act that, without being a crime, compromises the dignity of the office and devalues it in the opinion of the public, provided that he has previously been sanctioned with suspension; who has been convicted of an offense against sexual liberty; who has acted while legally prohibited, in full knowledge of this circumstance; who has been sentenced to prison for an intentional offense; who reoffends in the case of an act that results in suspension, and in the other cases established by law. 29. Furthermore, Article 212 of the Organic Law of the Judiciary indicated that it was not appropriate to punish “differences of opinion or criteria in decisions taken in proceedings.”20 30. Subsequently, the Peruvian Constitution of December 29, 1993, created the National Council of the Judiciary and assigned it the function of applying the sanction of dismissal to the judges of all instances.21 The Constitution also established that decisions of the National Council of the Judiciary concerning the evaluation and ratification of judges could not be reviewed.22 31. On November 25, 1994, the Organic Law of the National Council of the Judiciary was enacted. This law reiterated the provisions of the Constitution, to the effect that it was the function of the National Council of the Judiciary to apply the sanction of dismissal to judges of all instances.23 In addition, it established the grounds for which the sanction of dismissal was applicable: Article 31. The sanction of dismissal referred to in paragraph (c) of Article 21 of this law is applicable for the following reasons: 1. Being subject to a prison sentence for an intentional offense. 2. Committing a serious act that, without being a crime, compromises the dignity of the office and devalues it in the opinion of the public. 3. Reoffending in the case of an act that constitutes grounds for suspension, as established in the relevant law. 4. Intervening in procedures or proceedings in the knowledge that this is prohibited or subject to legal impediment. 32. Based on the foregoing, at the time of the facts, a judicial disciplinary procedure existed that involved two authorities: the Office for Control of Judges proposed the sanction of dismissal of judges to the National Council of the Judiciary, and the latter was responsible for deciding whether to impose this sanction after following the procedure regulated by law. B. Appointment of Héctor Fidel Cordero Bernal as Fourth Criminal Judge of the city of Huánuco 20 Cf. Article 212. Organic Law of the Judiciary, June 2, 1993 (evidence file, folio 1713). 21 Cf. Article 153. Peruvian Constitution, December 29, 1993 (evidence file, folio 1529). 22 Cf. Article 142. Peruvian Constitution, December 29, 1993 (evidence file, folio 1527). Cf. Articles 2 and 21.c). Organic Law of the National Council of the Judiciary, November 25, 1994 (evidence file, folios 1634 and 1639). 23 9