caused to the victims; ii) determine whether the amounts should be calculated up to 2008 or else until the publication of this Judgment; iii) settle the dispute raised by the State regarding the judges who held public office after their dismissal, and iv) establish the criteria and set the amounts corresponding to each victim in this case. 1(1). Pecuniary damage 232. The Court emphasizes that the violations declared in this Judgment are related to the principle of judicial independence and its implications for due process whereby, as a result of their arbitrary dismissal, the judges suffered financial loss, since they no longer earned income from their work as members of the Judiciary. They had a right to this income, given that none had acted in a manner that constituted grounds for dismissal, which gave them the legitimate expectation of continuing to earn a salary based on the position they held. This led them to take on financial commitments which they had the legitimate expectation of being able to meet, unless they were dismissed for reasons attributable to their own actions. In this regard, Mr. Arturo Donoso stated at the public hearing that he: “[joined] the [Supreme] Court knowing that [his] duties were for life [, and therefore] ma[de] a life plan according to the earnings he expect[ed] to obtain from his work […] and obviously [he] acquire[d] some financial commitments for a very sad reason – [his] third child suffered from an unknown congenital disease […] for which there is no treatment, […] and Quito, the capital of Ecuador, is a city 2819 meters above sea level and it is impossible for a person with that disease to live at that altitude. In order to prolong [his child’s] life and improve his basic conditions, a basic human right, […he] and [his] wife acquire[d] a mortgage to buy a small house by the sea [and they] became indebted for that.” 253 233. Mr. Donoso, in turn, testified on the situation of several of his colleagues. Indeed, he stated that: “Dr. Milton Moreno Aguirre developed cancer shortly after he was dismissed in that way. He did not have the financial means to manage and in order to cover his treatment his wife had to sell her only property in the city of Guayaquil and subsequently he died. Dr. Miguel Villacís […] was ousted in an unconstitutional, unlawful and unspeakable manner when he only had another six months to work before retirement and he lost all his retirement benefits and had to live on the meager earnings he was able to obtain, after having been a professional judge, [he had to] learn to litigate and live on the small income that he had.” 254 234. Similarly, Mr. Bermeo Castillo explained that from the time of his dismissal he had only been able to obtain contracts for occasional services, which created constant financial uncertainty. 255 Mr. Brito Mieles stated that since his dismissal his professional activity had diminished with a progressive loss of work. 256 Mr. Ramírez Alvarez explained that he had not exercised his profession for seven years, and therefore starting over implied a difficult situation since he had to reopen his office and acquire clients. 257 Mr. Riofrío Corral explained that he had to submit an application for retirement to obtain a monthly pension set at US$ 220, because he had not paid contributions for the required time or reached the required 253 Declaration rendered by Mr. Donoso Castellón before the Inter-American Court in the public hearing held in this case. 254 Statement rendered by Mr. Donoso Castellón before the Inter-American Court in the public hearing held in this case. 255 Cf. Affidavit rendered by Armando Bermeo Castillo (File of attachments to brief of pleadings and motions, volume I, page 2372). 256 Cf. Affidavit rendered by Eduardo Enrique Brito Mieles (File of attachments to brief of pleadings and motions, volume I, page 2403). 257 Cf. Affidavit rendered by Jorge Enrique Ramírez Álvarez (File of attachments to brief of pleadings and motions, volume I, page 2648). 66