38 142. As this Court has already determined, the petition for habeas corpus filed by Gustavo Cesti Hurtado fulfills all the requirements set forth in the Convention, which establishes an appropriate method to ensure the liberty of the affected person. Once Gustavo Cesti Hurtado sought and obtained the pertinent remedy, the existence of other remedies became irrelevant – even if it could be shown that they were equally effective. 143. As a result of the refusal of the military authorities to obey and execute the legitimate order of the Public Law Chamber and of the subsequent detention, prosecution and sentencing of Gustavo Cesti Hurtado, the State violated his right to personal liberty as guaranteed in Article 7(1), (2) and (3) of the Convention. XI VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 8(1) AND (2) 144. As stated by the Commission in the text of the application, since Gustavo Cesti Hurtado is considered a retired member of the armed forces, with no military function, Peruvian legislation considers him a private citizen. Moreover, under Peruvian legislation, the service contract between Gustavo Cesti Hurtado’s firm and COLOGE does not constitute a relationship that would justify treating the victim as a member of the armed forces. Consequently, submitting Gustavo Cesti Hurtado to an action before military judges would constitute a liberal interpretation of the military jurisdiction and would violate his right to be submitted to a competent judge and jurisdiction and his right to be judged by an impartial judge. 145. The Commission also argued that the State continued to violate the rights of the victim by persisting in the action under the military justice system and pronouncing a judgment that did not result from a due process and that, if there was a complaint about the victim’s conduct, the State had the obligation to file the corresponding charge under the ordinary jurisdiction. The Commission concluded that none of the results of the proceeding against Gustavo Cesti Hurtado under military jurisdiction “should have juridical effect”. 146. In this respect, Peru stated in its answer to the application that Gustavo Cesti Hurtado did not lose his military status and, anyway he was in the reserve when he performed functions in the Logistics Command of the Army, responsible for the insurance area, so that, according to Article 168 of the Constitution of Peru, he was subject to “the respective laws and regulations”, one of which is the Code of Military Justice, and pursuant to the latter he was prosecuted and sentenced. The State added that the crime for which Gustavo Cesti Hurtado was accused had been carried out against military finances and in connivance with officers on active duty, that it was committed when he performed functions in COLOGE and when he was subordinate to the General Officer who commanded this unit and, moreover, that he had an office and authorized access. Therefore, Peru believes that the organ that issued the order of arrest against Gustavo Cesti Hurtado was competent to do so and its competence was not invalidated or disputed, so that there was a statutory extension of jurisdiction. 147. Furthermore, the State asserted that the proceedings against Gustavo Cesti Hurtado respected the Constitution, the Organic Law of Military Justice and procedural principles that offer full guarantees “to both the defendant and the