39 convicted person”. It repeated that if Gustavo Cesti Hurtado considered that he had been judged by an incompetent jurisdiction, he should have presented a jurisdictional dispute or a plea as to the jurisdiction of the court or a writ of amparo, which the said constitutional law allows. 148. In its final arguments, the Commission declared that, according to the Constitution, when an officer retires, he exercises his political rights and obligations without any limitation. One of the civil rights of all persons is the right to be judged by a competent, impartial judge, established by law and not to be diverted from the appropriate jurisdiction, and these rights “are violated when military officers attempt to judge retired members of the armed forces”. Moreover, the military jurisdiction is an exceptional justice, as the ordinary jurisdiction is the general rule; this implies that military justice should be liable to restrictive interpretation and, in case of doubt, the ordinary jurisdiction should be chosen. 149. In its final arguments, the State indicated that Gustavo Cesti Hurtado was heard by a judge with general jurisdiction, with regard to whom none of the grounds for impediment that are specifically established in the Code of Military Justice existed; that the facts denounced were defined in the law as crimes; that the preliminary declaration was taken in the presence of defense counsels, and that he had extensive guarantees and plurality of instances, which shows that due process was respected throughout the proceedings. 150. Article 8 of the Convention establishes that 1. Every person has the right to a hearing, with due guarantees and within a reasonable time, by a competent, independent, and impartial tribunal, previously established by law, in the substantiation of any accusation of a criminal nature made against him or for the determination of his rights and obligations of a civil, labor, fiscal, or any other nature. 2. Every person accused of a criminal offense has the right to be presumed innocent so long as his guilt has not been proven according to law. During the proceedings, every person is entitled, with full equality, to the following minimum guarantees: a. the right of the accused to be assisted without charge by a translator or interpreter, if he does not understand or does not speak the language of the tribunal or court; b. prior notification in detail to the accused of the charges against him; c. adequate time and means for the preparation of his defense; d. the right of the accused to defend himself personally or to be assisted by legal counsel of his own choosing, and to communicate freely and privately with his counsel; e. the inalienable right to be assisted by counsel provided by the state, paid or not as the domestic law provides, if the accused does not defend himself personally or engage his own counsel within the time period established by law; f. the right of the defense to examine witnesses present in the court and to obtain the appearance, as witnesses, of experts or other persons who may throw light on the facts; g. the right not to be compelled to be a witness against himself or to plead guilty; and h. the right to appeal the judgment to a higher court.