78 vi) had the writers of the Code of Military Justice wished to extend the military jurisdiction to “civilian contract personnel,” they would have expressly stated so as they did in Article 7 of said Code, which sets forth that “cadets, cabin boys, apprentices, and regular students of the military Schools, as well as civilian employees of the Armed and Police Forces who are included in the cases considered in subparagraph (3) of Article 5 shall be subjected to the jurisdiction of military courts;” and vii) the mere fact that a person has a labor relationship with the Armed Forces cannot be deemed as grounds for considering that he or she has military status. c) Regarding the violation of Article 8(1) of the Convention, in relation to Article 25 thereof on the lack of independence of the military courts, the representatives argued that: i) Mr. Palamara was not tried by an independent and impartial court in the two criminal proceedings wherein he was convicted. The structure of the Chilean naval military justice violates the requirement to be tried by an impartial and independent court;” ii) Mr. Palamara-Iribarne was tried by a judge who was a Navy activeduty member, who, as such, was not qualified to render an independent and impartial judgment. If the victim of the crime is the Navy and the judge is a member of the Navy, the latter is subject to military hierarchical subordination, which is in violation of objective impartiality; iii) the various functions taken up by the Naval Prosecutor who conducted the investigation in the proceedings brought against Mr. Palamara are not compatible. From the moment the Naval Prosecutor conducts an investigation into the commission of a crime, he is no longer independent to adopt decisions that may affect the rights of the accused; iv) the Code of Military Justice provides that it is the duty of prosecutors to issue arrest and imprisonment warrants. The orders issued by the military prosecutor as a general rule are not appealable. The prosecutor may issue an imprisonment warrant, “on the mere grounds that there is sufficient reason to suspect that a person has committed an offense, either as perpetrator or accessory before, during, or after the fact. He may even issue a warrant of arrest to ensure the appearance of the accused,” as it happened in the case of Mr. Palamara. The order of preventive detention was issued by the Interim Prosecutor, who is a member of the Chilean Navy, and whose military superior is the Commander-in-Chief of the Third Naval Zone. Likewise, it was the Interim Prosecutor who ordered the seizure from the publishing company and from Mr. Palamara’s house of all the material regarding the above-mentioned book and ordered him to erase the full text of the book from the hard disk of his personal computer;