60 k. the 270 workers who are the alleged victims in the instant case worked at the following public institutions: National Telecommunications Institute, National Port Authority, Bayano Cement State Enterprise, National Renewable Natural Resources Institute, Water Resources and Electric Power Institute, National Water and Sewerage Institute, Ministry of Public Works, and Ministry of Education;27 l. For purposes of putting into effect the dismissals of the public workers that took place either before the passing of Law 25, or after it was passed, the workers were identified on the basis of the reports or lists prepared by the directors, supervisors, heads of sections and departments, and those administratively and operationally responsible at the work sites. For purposes of preparation of said reports they based themselves on the knowledge that they had of their activities towards the promotion, organisation or participation in the December 5, 1990, work stoppage;28 m. before the passing of Law 25, the workers of the IRHE and the INTEL were subject to the provisions of Law 8 of February 25, 1975, and to their respective internal labour regulations, under a special labour jurisdiction. The employer had to notify the worker in advance and in writing about the date of and cause for dismissal. The IRHE Internal Regulations instructed that, before proceeding to dismiss any worker, the immediate superior had to submit a request for dismissal to the Personnel Management Department, whereupon the latter would forward the case to the Labour and Social Well Being Co-ordination Department for the performance of an investigation, which had to include an interview with the worker. Later, and on the basis of the results of the investigation, the Legal Services Directorate had to issue a legal opinion and forward it to the General Directorate Court in connection with the full-jurisdiction administrative conflicts actions brought by Carlos del-Cid in representation of Yadira Delgado, Luis Alfonso Estribi-R., Alfonso Fernández-Urriola, Eleno Augusto GarcíaCastro, Alejandrina Gordon-Rivera, Ricardo Antonio Guiseppitt-Pérez, Rigoberto Isaacs-Rozzi, and Marisol Landau; volume I of the record of the case before the Administrative Conflicts Section of the Supreme Court, concerning the full-jurisdiction administrative conflicts actions brought by Vicente Archibold-Blake in representaion of Miguel Angel Osorio, Sergio Ochoa-Castro, Christian Eliécer-Pérez, Rúben D. Pérez, Giovani E. Prado-S., Fredys Pérez, Miguel L. Bermúdez-T., and Andrés Bermúdez; volume I of the record of the case before the Administrative Conflicts Section of the Supreme Court, concerning the fulljurisdiction administrative conflicts actions brought by Vicente Archibold-Blake, in representation of Luis Anaya, Juan Bautista Quijada-B., Cayetano Cruz, and Jaime E. Camarena; volume I of the record of the case before the Administrative Conflicts Section of the Supreme Court, concerning the full-jurisdiction administrative conflicts actions brought by Vicente Archibold-Blake, in representation of Andrés A. Aleman -L., Santiago Alvarado, Pedro Atencio-Madrid, Javier Atencio-Arauz, Víctor Arauz-Núñez, Rubén D. Barraza, Luis Bernuil-Z., Alba Oritela-Berrio, José Inés Blanco-Obando, and Jaime A. Batista; volume I of the record of the case before the Administrative Conflicts Section of the Supreme Court, concerning the full-jurisdiction administrative conflicts actions brought by Carlos del-Cid in representation of Ivanor Alonso, Arnoldo Aguilar-U., Lionel Angulo, Luis Coronado, Elberto Luis Cobos, Carlos Catline-Todd, Judith de-la-Rosa-de-Correa, and Alfonso Chambers; record of the case before the Full Supreme Court concerning the three unconstitutionality actions brought by Vicente Archibold-Blake, in representation of Isaac Rodríguez; by Santander Tristán-Donoso et al; and by Basilio Chong-Gómez, in representation of Rolando Miller et al., against Law 25 of December 14, 1990; 27 cfr. “Preliminary report prepared by the Dismissed Workers Committee concerning the obligations of due payment to workers dismissed pursuant to Law 25 of December 14, 1990 in the Republic of Panama;” and letters of dismissal and personnel actions pertaining to the workers. 28 cfr. testimony of José Mauad-Doré delivered before the Inter-American Court on January 26, 2000; testimony of Manrique Mejía delivered before the Inter-American Court on January 26, 2000; testimony of Luis Antonio Batista-Juárez delivered before the Inter-American Court on January 26, 2000; testimony of Guillermo Alfredo Ford-Boyd delivered before the Inter-American Court on January 27, 2000; testimony of Jorge de-la-Guardia delivered before the Inter-American Court on January 27, 2000.