party to determine its litigation strategy, and the opposing party may pose the objections it deems appropriate in accordance with the Rules of Procedure. 22. Regarding the alleged communication between the party and the witness Luis Talavera prior to his testimony at the hearing, the Court's Rules of Procedure establish in Article 51(6) that declarants may not be present during the testimony of another alleged victim, witness, or expert witness at a hearing before the Court. In the instant case, the witness Luis Talavera was outside the courtroom until the time of his testimony, so there was no violation of this Court’s Rules of Procedure. 23. Meanwhile, as the arguments made regarding the other statements, they refer to their evidentiary value and not to the admissibility of the evidence. Consequently, the Court will take into account the observations made by the State when assessing this evidence, together with the rest of the body of evidence. 24. Moreover, in following with the request by the President of the Court at the hearing, the State submitted the written version of Osvaldo Alfredo Gozaíni's expert report alongside its final arguments. In its observations, the representation of the alleged victim considered that said expert report "was not conducted with a neutral and objective approach." In this regard, this Court considers that the allegations presented by the representative refer to the evidentiary value of the expert opinion and not to its admissibility. 25. Thus, the Court deems it pertinent to admit the statements made in a public hearing and before a notary public, as well as the written version of the expert opinion, as long as they comply with the purpose defined by the Presidency in the Order that provided they be received. V FACTS 26. In view of the points raised by the parties and the Commission, the relevant facts of the case will be presented below in the following order: A) relevant regulatory framework; B) the appointment of Alejandro Nissen Pessolani and his performance as Public Prosecutor; C) the disciplinary procedure applied against Public Prosecutor Nissen Pessolani; D) the second complaint filed against Public Prosecutor Nissen Pessolani; and E) the unconstitutionality action filed by the alleged victim. A. Relevant regulatory framework 27. The impeachment and the removal of Magistrates and Public Prosecutors is defined in the Political Constitution of Paraguay, as follows: Article 253. IMPEACHMENT AND REMOVAL OF MAGISTRATES Judicial Magistrates may only be tried and removed for committing crimes, or for malfeasance of their functions specified in the law, by the decision of a Jury of Impeachment [Enjuiciamiento] of Magistrates. It will be composed of two ministers of the Supreme Court of Justice, two members of the Council of the Magistrature, two Senators and two Representatives; these last four must be lawyers. The law will regulate the functioning of the Jury of Impeachment [Enjuiciamiento] of Magistrates. Article 270. PROSECUTORS Prosecutors are appointed in the same way that this Constitution establishes for the judges. They remain in their duties and are removed by the same procedures. 7