-20case may be, a violation of a right, and to itself redress the damage caused.113 Therefore, not declaring state responsibility requires evaluating whether the state made it stop and if it redressed the consequences of the measure or situation that caused it.114 76. In the instant case, as to the first condition, which refers to whether the violations ceased, the Court concludes in the affirmative, based on the fact that the amparo application filed by Mr. Colindres Schonenberg after his first dismissal was resolved favorably by the Constitutional Division, reinstating him to his position. In particular, the Constitutional Division pointed out that the dismissal decision was carried out without prior procedure, since it does not appear that any process was carried out to determine whether Mr. Colindres did in fact incur in the justifiable grounds for his dismissal, nor was he granted any opportunity to defend himself. After analyzing the facts from the normative perspective, [the] Division concluded[ed] that the Legislative Assembly disrespected Dr. Eduardo Colindres' constitutional right to a hearing, which consists of […] granting a hearing before the competent authority to be able to defend – within a reasonable time – in a full and comprehensive manner, his remaining in office for the period for which he was elected, allowing him to provide evidence that is conducive and applicable to the matter.115 77. The Constitutional Division also pointed out that, "a materialization of this stability in the position means that he has the right to remain in the position during the period for which he was elected,” and therefore, it concluded that "the restorative effect translates, necessarily, into his reinstatement to the post.”116 Similarly, the Constitutional Division ordered that Mr. Colindres Schonenberg be paid the wages he had not received.117 78. Therefore, in the judgment issued by the Constitutional Division on November 4, 1997, the State effectively guaranteed Mr. Colindres Schonenberg's judicial guarantees, thereby ceasing the alleged violation.118 79. As to the second condition, which refers to whether the violations were redressed, this Court found that Mr. Colindres Schonenberg was paid the wages he did not receive during the time he was dismissed, in addition to the amount of USD $114,285.60 for pain and suffering caused. To this effect, and pursuant to the Court's practice in granting the amounts awarded in cases where arbitrary dismissals have been determined similar to those in the instant case, the Court holds that this redress is appropriate to redress the damage caused to Mr. Colindres Schonenberg. 80. Based on the foregoing, and in accordance with the principle of complementarity, the Court holds that the State is not responsible for the alleged violations of the Convention that allegedly caused the first dismissal of Mr. Colindres Schonenberg. Cf. Case of the Santo Domingo Massacre v. Colombia Judgment on Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs, para. 143, and Case of Amrhein et al. v. Costa Rica. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of April 25, 2018. Series C No. 354, para. 99. 114 Cf., mutatis mutandis, Case of the Santo Domingo Massacre v. Colombia Preliminary Objections, Merits and Reparations. Judgment of November 30, 2012. Series C No. 259, para. 171; Case of Duque v. Colombia Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of February 26, 2016. Series C No. 310, para. 137, and Case of Andrade Salmon v. Bolivia. Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of December 01, 2016. Series C No. 330, para. 96. 115 Cf. Resolution of the Constitutional Division of November 4, 1997 (evidence file, folio 372). 116 Cf. Resolution of the Constitutional Division of November 4, 1997 (evidence file, folio 373). 117 Cf. Resolution of the Constitutional Division of November 4, 1997 (evidence file, folio 375). According to the evidence provided by the State, Mr. Colindres received payment of the wages he had not received beginning upon his dismissal in November 1996, and until his reinstatement in November 1997, for a total amount of 169,571.76 Salvadoran colones and seventy-six cents. Cf. Copy of the payroll receipts for Eduardo Benjamín Colindres for the months of December 1996 to November 1997 (evidence file, folios 1993 to 2007). 118 Mutatis Mutandis, Case of Andrade Salmón v. Bolivia. Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of December 01, 2016. Series C No. 330, para. 100. 113