36. The Court has no information regarding the notification to Víctor Henrry Mina Cuero of the decision to establish the Disciplinary Tribunal, as well as the date and time scheduled for the hearing. 37. On October 25, 2000, a hearing was held before the Disciplinary Tribunal at the "Casino of the 'Esmeraldas' Provincial Police Command No. 14." Mr. Mina Cuero attended the hearing with the assistance of a defense attorney he had hired. At the beginning of the hearing, the Court Secretary "read [out] the documentation that serve[d] as backgroun[d]" to the proceedings, including memorandum No. 2000-1602-CPD-SS of October 17, 2000, the "[i]nformative [r]eports [...] dated September 15 [and] 16,” and the "[i]nformative [r]eports [...] dated September 20, 2000" (supra para. 29, 30, 34, and 35).32 38. During the hearing, the Deputy Chief of the Judicial Police, who signed the respective investigation report, confirmed the content of that document. Similarly, three of the police officers who issued the police report on September 15, 2000, reaffirmed the information that had been reported regarding the events of that day. The officer who signed the police report of September 16, 2000, also confirmed what was reported in that document. Likewise, the cousin of Víctor Henrry Mina Cuero appeared; in this regard, the President of the Disciplinary Tribunal, based on article 27 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the National Civil Police,33 decided to "dispen[se]" with the statement of the person in question. When giving his statement, Mr. Mina Cuero pointed out that what the police officers said "lack[ed] legal support,” while "acknowledgi[ng] having said [...] 'rough [p]olicemen' to [his] colleagues."34 39. The President of the Disciplinary Tribunal then ordered that the "[P]rofessional [L]ife [C]ard" of Mr. Mina Cuero be read out as follows: V[íctor] H[enrry] M[ina] C[uero], who joined the institution as a Professional Police Officer on April [1] 1993, has four disciplinary sanctions in his professional career, totaling 74 days of one higher-level arrest. Furthermore[,] he has no record of being promoted to the next higher grade due to not meeting the requirements of [A]rt[icles] 68 and 81 of the current Personnel Law. He has a criminal trial for homicide that has been [p]rovisionally [d]ismissed[.] He was discharged by a ruling of the Disciplinary Court and was reinstated by a resolution of the Constitutional Court.35 40. When the lawyer appointed by Mr. Mina Cuero to represent him was given the floor, he stated, among other issues, that the statement of the police officer subjected to disciplinary proceedings "h[ad] not been given in the presence of a [d]efense [l]awyer, which h[ad] violated the Constitution of the State, and therefore the [i]nvestigative [r]eport lack[ed] validity."36 41. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Disciplinary Tribunal issued its Resolution, in which, inter alia, it stated as follows: Cf. Minutes of the Hearing and Resolution of October 25, 2000, from the National Police Disciplinary Tribunal (case file of evidence, volume I, annex 12 to the Merits Report, pages 46 to 51). 33 Article 27 of the National Civil Police's Code of Criminal Procedure, published on August 20, 1960 (available at: https://docs.ecuador.justia.com/nacionales/codigos/codigo-penal-de-la-policia-nacional.pdf): "Those accused of being co-authors, accomplices, or concealing the offense being judged cannot serve as witnesses, nor can their spouse or relatives within the fourth degree of consanguinity or second degree of affinity [...]". 34 Cf. Minutes of the Hearing and Resolution of October 25, 2000, from the National Police Disciplinary Tribunal (case file of evidence, volume I, annex 12 to the Merits Report, pages 47 to 49). 35 Cf. Minutes of the Hearing and Resolution of October 25, 2000, from the National Police Disciplinary Tribunal (case file of evidence, volume I, annex 12 to the Merits Report, page 49). 36 Cf. Minutes of the Hearing and Resolution of October 25, 2000, from the National Police Disciplinary Tribunal (case file of evidence, volume I, annex 12 to the Merits Report, page 49). 32