not competent to take up the appeal filed because that tribunal's jurisdiction is governed by the Labor Code, which establishes two conditions of jurisdiction. It said that the first condition is that it "only hears at a single instance cases concerning final administrative decisions issued by the National Civil Service Board,” as is stated in Article 80 of the Civil Service Law. 52 It added that the second condition is governed by Article 303 of the Labor Code. In that connection, the Second Division held that: ... [they] take cognizance of decisions issued by the Labor and Social Security Courts or the Arbitration Tribunals when an appeal or consultation is admissible, which are precepts of a legislative nature that take precedence within the hierarchy of laws over the Personnel Regulations of the Office of the Human Rights Ombudsman.53 52. The Second Division found that none of these conditions was met in Mrs. Maldonado's case. Therefore, it concluded that it "cannot take up a referred matter between the Office of the Human Rights Ombudsman and Mrs. Olga Yolanda Maldonado Ordóñez because it lacks jurisdiction.”54 2.4. Action of unconstitutionality "in a specific case” 53. On August 23, 2000, Mrs. Maldonado filed an action of unconstitutionality in a specific case before the Second Division of the Court of Appeals in Labor and Social Security Matters against its decision of June 26 of that year.55 She argued that the decision violated her rights to work and recourse to justice recognized in Articles 29 and 101 of the Constitution, respectively. 56 She added that the Second Division’s interpretation of Articles 36557 of the Labor Code and 80 of the Civil Service Law is unconstitutional and restrictive, to the extent that it left her without protection. 58 She held that the Second Division should have examined the appeal in the light of Article 29 of the Constitution and Articles 10 and 15 of the Judiciary Law, which recognize the right of recourse to justice.59 54. On September 6, 2000, the Second Division of the Court of Appeals in Labor and Social Security Matters, acting as Constitutional Court, rejected the action of unconstitutionality in a specific case filed by Mrs. Maldonado.60 It held that “to seek to claim that an administrative organ can create the necessary jurisdiction to enable the divisions of the Court of Appeals in Labor and Social Security Matters, through an 52 Annex 18. Decision of the Second Division of the Court of Appeals in Labor and Social Security Matters, dated June 26, 2000. Appendix 10 to the initial petition of July 15, 2002. 53 Annex 18. Decision of the Second Division of the Court of Appeals in Labor and Social Security Matters, dated June 26, 2000. Appendix 10 to the initial petition of July 15, 2002. 54 Annex 18. Decision of the Second Division of the Court of Appeals in Labor and Social Security Matters, dated June 26, 2000. Appendix 10 to the initial petition of July 15, 2002. 55 Annex 19. Brief of Olga Maldonado to the Second Division of the Court of Appeals in Labor and Social Security Matters, dated August 23, 2000. Appendix 11 to the initial petition of July 15, 2002. 56 Annex 19. Brief of Olga Maldonado to the Second Division of the Court of Appeals in Labor and Social Security Matters, dated August 23, 2000. Appendix 11 to the initial petition of July 15, 2002. 57 Annex 8. Article 365 of the Labor Code: (…) In labor proceedings, the following remedies may be invoked against judgments or orders that bring an end to the trial: (a) A motion for clarification and enlargement, which must be presented within 24 hours following notice of the ruling. Clarification will be requested if the terms of the judgment are obscure, ambiguous, or contradictory, in order to clarify or rectify their meaning. Enlargement will be requested if a ruling has been omitted on any aspect or aspects submitted for trial; and (b) An appeal, which must be presented within three days following notice of the ruling. 58 Annex 19. Brief of Olga Maldonado to the Second Division of the Court of Appeals in Labor and Social Security Matters, dated August 23, 2000. Appendix 11 to the initial petition of July 15, 2002. 59 Annex 19. Brief of Olga Maldonado to the Second Division of the Court of Appeals in Labor and Social Security Matters, dated August 23, 2000. Appendix 11 to the initial petition of July 15, 2002. 60 Annex 20. Decision of the Second Division of the Court of Appeals in Labor and Social Security Matters, dated September 6, 2000. Appendix 12 to the initial petition of July 15, 2002. 11