on this occasion to include the analysis of this article and declare the violation of the right to access to public service under conditions of equality, since it is evident that, in the case of a position at the Prosecutor's Office, Mr. Nissen Pessolani was a public official. Indeed, as this Court has pointed out, following the provisions of General comment 25 of the United Nations Human Rights Committee, 34 Article 23(1)(c) does not only enshrine the right to access public office, but also the right to do so under conditions of equality and to remain in employment. This implies the criteria and processes for appointment, promotion, suspension, and dismissal must be objective and reasonable, and must be respected and guaranteed, and that persons do not suffer discrimination in the course of such procedures. 35 This was precisely the breached obligation in the case, as Mr. Nissen Pessolani was dismissed from his position without the fulfillment of a reasonable and objective procedure. 7. The above is not merely a nominal distinction, as I have stated in other separate opinions, using Article 26 of the Convention to declare the State's liability is legally unacceptable and affects the legitimacy of the decision. Therefore, determining Paraguay's liability solely based on Article 23(1)(c) of the American Convention on Human Rights would not only have provided a more precise response to Mr. Nissen Pessolani's factual situation and allowed the Court to advance its case law on the scope of this right in the American Convention, but it would have also avoided affecting the effectiveness of the decision due to the inconsistencies of the direct justiciability of Article 26 of the ACHR. Therefore, once again, it is demonstrated that the use of this treaty provision serves the sole purpose of reaffirming a jurisprudential approach regarding the ESCER, regardless of whether it is relevant or necessary to ensure justice in the specific case. Humberto Antonio Sierra Porto Judge Pablo Saavedra Alessandri Secretary Cf. United Nations. Human Rights Committee. General Comment No. 25, Article 25: The Right to Participate in Public Affairs and Voting Rights, CCPR/C/21/Rev. 1/Add. 7, July 12, 1996, para. 23. 34 35 Cf. Case of Apitz Barbera et al. (“First Court of Administrative Disputes”) v. Venezuela. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations, and costs. Judgment of August 5, 2008. Series C No. 182, para. 206. 4