C. Right to participate in government45 74. Article 23.1.c establishes the right to have access to public office “under general conditions of equality.” The Court has interpreted this article to mean that “when a judge’s tenure is arbitrarily impaired, the right to judicial independence recognized in Article 8.1 of the American Convention is violated, as is the right of access to public service and tenure, under general conditions of equality, established in Article 23.1.c.” 46 75. The Commission finds that the above-cited standard is also applicable to prosecutors, in light of the preceding considerations in the instant report to the effect that the guarantees of reinforced stability of judges are also applicable to prosecutors and must also protect the latter in order to ensure independence in the exercise of their office. 76. In the instant case, it has been established that Mr. Casa Nina was removed from his provisional prosecutor position in a proceeding that did not comply with the required minimum guarantees, as described throughout the instant report. In such circumstances and consistent with the criterion mentioned in the preceding paragraph, the Commission finds that the State has also violated Article 23.1 c) of the American Convention, in connection with Article 1.1 of the same instrument, to the detriment of Julio Casa Nina. V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 77. The Commission concludes that the Peruvian State is responsible for violation of the right to a fair trial, to freedom from ex post facto law and to judicial protection, as enshrined in Article 8.1, 8.2, 8.2 b), 8.2 c), 9, 23.1 c) and 25.1 of the American Convention, in connection with the obligations established in Articles 1.1 and 2 of the same instrument, to the detriment of Julio Casa Nina. 78. Based on the analysis and conclusions of the instant report, THE INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS, RECOMMENDS TO THE PERUVIAN STATE, 1. 2. To reinstate the victim in a similar position to the one he served in, with the same remuneration, social benefits and a comparable rank to the one he would be entitled to today had he not been removed. In the event that the victim should not wish to be reinstated or there are objective reasons preventing his reinstatement, the State shall pay compensation for this reason, which is independent from reparations relating to the material or moral damages included in recommendation number two. To provide full reparation for the consequences of the violations declared in the instant report, including both tangible and intangible damages. 3. To adopt necessary measures of non-repetition to prevent similar events from taking place in the future. In particular, ensure application of the rules of due process in the context of the proceedings for the dismissal or removal of prosecutors, regardless of whether or not they are provisional. 4. To adopt the necessary measures so that domestic law and relevant practice conform to clear criteria and ensure guarantees in the appointment, tenure and removal of prosecutors, pursuant to the criteria set forth in the instant report. Article 23 of the American Convention establishes, in the relevant portions, that: 1. Every citizen shall enjoy the following rights and opportunities: (…) c. to have access, under general conditions of equality, to public service of his country. 2. The law may regulate the exercise of the rights and opportunities referred to in the preceding paragraph only on the basis of age, nationality, residence, language, education, civil and mental capacity, or sentencing by a competent court in criminal proceedings. 46 IA Court of HR. Case of López Lone et al v. Honduras. Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of October 5, 2015. Series C No. 302, par. 192. 45 14