96. This Court has repeatedly addressed this right in relation to the dismissal processes of judges114 and prosecutors,115 and has considered that it is related to the guarantee of stability or irremovability in the position.116 Thus, the respect and guarantee of this right is fulfilled when the criteria and procedures for appointment, promotion, suspension and dismissal of judges and prosecutors are reasonable and objective, and exercise of said procedures does not discriminate against individuals.117 97. Having established the foregoing, the Court finds that, as evidenced in the instant case (above paras. 76 and 91), the removal of Mr. Nissen Pessolani from his position as Prosecutor through the trial by the JEM disregarded the guarantees of due process, which arbitrarily affected his remaining in his position as Prosecutor. Consequently, this Court considers that the State unduly affected his right to remain in office under conditions of equality, in violation of the right enshrined in Article 23(1)(c) of the American Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) thereof, to the detriment of Mr. Alejandro Nissen Pessolani. 98. Regarding the allegations presented by the representative on the alleged violation of the alleged victim's rights when he was eliminated from the lists of candidates for the position of State Prosecutor General in 2005, this Court notes that they refer to facts that are not part of the factual framework defined by the Commission in its Merits Report, and therefore, it will not rule on them. VI-4 RIGHT TO JOB SECURITY118 99. The Court notes that neither the Commission nor the representative expressly alleged a violation of Article 26 of the Convention in the instant case. However, by virtue of the principle iura novit curia,119 the Court will rule on the violation of the right to job security to the detriment of the alleged victim. 100. The Court finds that, to analyze the violation of the right to job security, it is necessary to consider the position of simultaneity with the violations of the other rights as described above. In this regard, the Court has recognized that civil and political rights, as well as economic, social, cultural and environmental rights, are inseparable, so that their recognition and enjoyment are unfailingly guided by the principles of universality, 114 Cf. Inter alia, Case of Reverón Trujillo v. Venezuela, supra, para. 138; Case of Colindres Schonenberg v. El Salvador, supra, para. 93; Case of Moya Solís v. Peru, supra, para. 109, and Case of Cuyo Lavy et al. v. Peru, supra, para. 160. Cf. Case of Martínez Esquivia v. Colombia, supra, para. 115; Case of Casa Nina v. Peru, supra, para. 97; Case of Moya Solís v. Peru, supra, para. 109, and Case of Cuyo Lavy et al. v. Peru, supra, para. 160. 115 It should be recalled that in the case of Martínez Esquivia v. Colombia this Court concluded that the guarantee of job security and irremovability of judges, aimed at safeguarding their independence, is applicable to prosecutors due to the nature of the functions they perform. Cf. Case of Martínez Esquivia v. Colombia, supra, paras. 95 and 96. See also, Case of Casa Nina v. Peru, supra, para. 69; Case of Moya Solís v. Peru, supra, para. 109, and Case of Cuyo Lavy et al. v. Peru, supra, para. 160. 116 Cf. Case of Reverón Trujillo v. Venezuela, supra, para. 138, and Case of Cuyo Lavy et al. v. Peru, supra, para. 160. 117 118 Article 26 of the Convention. Cf. Case of Velásquez Rodríguez v. Honduras. Merits. Judgment of July 29, 1988. Series C No. 4, para. 163, and Case of Mina Cuero v. Ecuador, supra, para. 110. 119 30