66 63(19) and 63(20)); the proceedings conducted for the purpose of securing the copies of the book that were in the possession of several people (supra paras. 63(58) and 63(61)); and the order prohibiting Mr. Palamara-Iribarne to “make negative comments” on the proceedings instituted against him or regarding “the image” of the Navy (supra para. 63(38)). Although the book had been edited and Mr. Palamara-Iribarne had almost 1000 copies and promotional leaflets, it was not possible to actually distribute the book through Chilean bookstores and shops and, consequently, the public did not have the opportunity to buy a copy and have access to its content, as intended by Mr. Palamara-Iribarne. 75. The Court finds it somewhat surprising that, although in the expert reports requested by the Naval Prosecutor (supra para. 63(23)) the experts concluded that the book written by Mr. Palamara-Iribarne “[did] not breach the secrecy and security of the Chilean Navy,” the return of the copies and the material related to the book was never ordered. On the contrary, the prosecutor requested further expert examination of the book in order to verify whether it “contain[ed] relevant information from the point of view of the naval institution and/or information obtainable only from privileged sources and whether it affected institutional interests.” After said examination, the experts stated, inter alia, that the information contained in the book “may be obtained from open sources and that it was implied that [the] training [of Mr. Palamara-Iribarne] as an intelligence specialist […] enable[d] him to write about this topic.” 76. The Court considers that it is logical that Mr. Palamara-Iribarne’s training and professional and military experience helped him write the book and that it does not entail per se an abuse of his right to freedom of thought and expression. Any interpretation to the contrary would prevent individuals from using their education or professional training to enrich the expression of their ideas and opinions. 77. The Court understands that the employees or officers of an institution have the duty to maintain the confidentiality of certain information to which they have access in the course of their duties, when the content of said information is involved in such duty. The duty of confidentiality is not applicable to information related to the institution or the duties performed by it that is already in the public domain. However, under certain circumstances, a breach of the duty of confidentiality may result in administrative, tort or disciplinary liability. In the instant case, the content of the duty of confidentiality will not be examined insofar as it has been established that Mr. Palamara-Iribarne used information from “open sources” (supra para. 63(23)) to write the book “Ética y Servicios de Inteligencia” (“Ethics and Intelligence Services”). 78. The Court considers that, under the circumstances of the instant case, the control measures adopted by the State to prevent the distribution of the book “Ética y Servicios de Inteligencia” (“Ethics and Intelligence Services”) by Mr. PalamaraIribarne constituted acts of prior censorship that are incompatible with the parameters set by the Convention inasmuch as there was no element that, pursuant to said treaty, would call for the restriction of the right to freely publish his work, which is protected by Article 13 of the Convention. *