10 verify what had happened; and (iii) the documentary and physical evidence produced during the investigation carried out in the context of the proceeding. As regards the evidence produced during the investigative stage, the decision refers, among other things, to: (i) a Report from the Psychology Department of the 17-BS “PASTAZA” by which an analysis of the other soldier’s psychological profile was performed, and indicating that it was not possible to perform the psychological exam of Lt. Homero Flor given that he did not go to that department; (ii) certificates that attest to the “good conduct and honorability” of Lt. Homero Flor and the other soldier, as well as the résumés of both; and (iii) the report of the judicial inspection of the place where the events allegedly unfolded. 39. Based on that evidence, the decision of January 17, 2001 by the Court of Law established that on November 19, 2000, in the early morning hours, the other soldier and Lt. Homero Flor entered the latter’s sleeping quarters, located in the Villa for Unmarried Officers of the Amazonas Military Fort, and that they were seen “practicing oral sex” (“practicando sexo oral”) in that room.16 40. The Court went on to determine whether the infraction referred to in Article 117 of the Rules of Military Discipline —in force at the time of the facts— i.e. “committing acts of homosexuality” had actually taken place. The Court held that after having “investigated the acts of homosexuality committed,” it was shown that they were committed based on the testimonial evidence produced. In its analysis, the Court decided that such provision was not incompatible with the right enshrined in the Constitution of Ecuador of every person to make free and responsible decisions about his or her sexual life, highlighting the “special nature” of the military legislation, and appealing to military values such as honor, dignity, and extolling civic-mindedness. In its own words, the Court notes: The Constitution of Ecuador at Article 23(25), on the civil rights of citizens, guarantees the right to make free and responsible decisions about their sexual life. Nonetheless, in the armed forces, Article 117 of the Rules of Military Discipline is in force; it punishes acts of homosexuality, precisely because of the special nature of the military legislation, its philosophy and constitutional mission, to cultivate and keep intact and unified values such as honor, dignity, discipline … extolling civic-mindedness, exalting respect for the national symbols and the Ecuadorian nation, in view of the ethical and moral values it practices, and which are the essential elements of the integral training of the soldier, all of which is not compatible [with the] conduct and behavior adopted by the persons investigated since they are contrary to principles and norms of conduct that all members of the Armed Forces are obligated to observe, the Armed Forces being proud to be the moral reservoir of society, and to have in its ranks men of integrity, capable, responsible, and with unblemished moral authority that enables them to guide and lead 17 their subordinates in operations [and] activities particular to the military career. 41. In that context, the Court concluded: It has been shown procedurally by testimonial evidence and in light of reasoned analysis that acts of homosexualism were committed, i.e. oral sex between [LIEUTENANT] HOMERO FABIÁN FLOR FREIRE and [the other soldier], active-duty members of the military, within a military facility, with which the Armed Institution as such as been subjectively offended, and its image and prestige 16 The Court notes that it was established that this act had been committed with the testimony of Captain Colonel Néstor Maldonado, Lieutenant César Bracero, and Second Lieutenant Ronny Jativa, who gave “statements … that were unanimous and consistent with one another.” Annex 2. Resolution of the Court of Law of the Fourth Military Zone of January 17, 2001. Annex to the initial petition of August 20, 2002. 17 Annex 2. Resolution of the Court of Law of the Fourth Military Zone of January 17, 2001. Annex to the initial petition, August 20, 2002.