- 104 in his post of judge constituted an undue restriction of his freedom of expression, right of assembly and political rights, pursuant to paragraphs 160 to 177, 179 and 180. 4. The State is responsible for the violation of Articles 13(1) and 23 of the American Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) of this instrument, to the detriment of Tirza del Carmen Flores Lanza, because the disciplinary proceeding instituted against her and her subsequent dismissal constituted an undue restriction of her freedom of expression and political rights, pursuant to paragraphs 160 to 177, 181 and 182. 5. The State is responsible for the violation of Articles 13(1) and 23 of the American Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) of this instrument, to the detriment of Ramón Enrique Barrios Maldonado, because the disciplinary proceeding instituted against him constituted an undue restriction of his freedom of expression and political rights, pursuant to paragraphs 160 to 177 and 183. 6. The State is responsible for the violation of Article 16 of the American Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) of this instrument, to the detriment of Adán Guillermo López Lone, Tirza del Carmen Flores Lanza and Luis Alonso Chévez de la Rocha, owing to the undue violation of their freedom of association, pursuant to paragraph 186. 7. The State is responsible for the violation of Article 8(1) of the American Convention, in relation to Articles 1(1) and 2 of this instrument, to the detriment of Adán Guillermo López Lone, Tirza del Carmen Flores Lanza, Luis Alonso Chévez de la Rocha and Ramón Enrique Barrios Maldonado, owing to the violation of the guarantees of competence, independence and impartiality in the disciplinary proceedings to which they were subjected, as well as in relation to Article 23(1)(c) of the Convention owing to the arbitrary infringement of tenure in the exercise of judicial functions and the consequent violation of judicial independence, to the detriment of Adán Guillermo López Lone, Tirza del Carmen Flores Lanza and Luis Alonso Chévez de la Rocha, pursuant to paragraphs 207 to 240. 8. The State is responsible for the violation of Article 25(1) of the American Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) of this instrument, to the detriment of Adán Guillermo López Lone, Tirza del Carmen Flores Lanza, Luis Alonso Chévez de la Rocha and Ramón Enrique Barrios Maldonado, owing to the ineffectiveness of the application for amparo to contest the decisions in the disciplinary proceedings to which the victims were subjected, pursuant to paragraphs 245 to 250. 9. The State is responsible for the violation of Article 9 of the American Convention, in relation to Articles 1(1) and 2 of this instrument, to the detriment of Adán Guillermo López Lone, Tirza del Carmen Flores Lanza, Luis Alonso Chévez de la Rocha and Ramón Enrique Barrios Maldonado, owing to the excessive discretion in the establishment of the sanction of dismissal, as well as to the imprecision and breadth with which the disciplinary grounds were defined and applied to the victims in this case, pursuant to paragraphs 257 to 276. 10. The State is not responsible for the violation of Articles 16 and 23(1)(c) of the American Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) of this instrument, to the detriment of Ramón Enrique Barrios Maldonado, pursuant to paragraphs 186 and 238. 11. It is not necessary to rule on the alleged violation of the obligation to state the reasoning for a decision, the right of defense, the presumption of innocence, and the effectiveness of the remedy before the Judicial Service Council, pursuant to paragraph 241.