111. The representative requested "the exclusion from all background records of Mr. [...] Nissen Pessolani, information related to his having been dismissed for poor performance of his duties." In the final written arguments, he indicated that "given the current impossibility of restoring Mr. Nissen to his functions as Prosecutor, [it] requested the fixing of an alternative compensation [...] of US$ 100,000 (one hundred thousand US dollars)." 112. The State, in its answer and in its final written arguments, argued that "Mr. Nissen Pessolani has not requested his reinstatement," so that "even if the [J]udgment were favorable to Mr. Nissen Pessolani, this would not be a consequence to be considered." Likewise, with respect to the request of the alleged victim's representation to exclude Mr. Nissen Pessolani's sanction from all background records, he argued that "these requests exceed the dimensions of the case." 113. According to this Court’s case law, in the event of an arbitrary removal of a judge, he/she must be reinstated. Indeed, it is considered that immediate reinstatement in the event of arbitrary removal constitutes the least harmful measure to satisfy both the needs of good service and the guarantee of irremovability inherent to judicial independence.137 This measure of reparation also applies to prosecutors when they are removed from their post in violation of judicial guarantees based on the considerations previously indicated in this judgment.138 However, it should be taken into account that the victim did not request his reinstatement, but rather that compensation be fixed. From this account, the State shall pay Mr. Nissen Pessolani an indemnity that this Court fixes, in equity, at USD$30,000.00 (thirty thousand United States dollars). This sum shall be paid to Mr. Nissen Pessolani within a maximum period of one year from the date of notification of this Judgment. 114. Regarding the request to exclude the information that he had been dismissed for poor performance of his duties from all of Mr. Nissen Pessolani's background records, this Court determined that the sanction, in violation of due process, was arbitrary. Therefore, the Court considers that the State must adopt, within six months, all judicial, administrative, and any other measures to remove all mention of Mr. Nissen Pessolani's conviction from any existing public record. C. Measures of satisfaction 115. The Court orders, as it has done in other cases,139 that the State publish, within six months of notification of this Judgment, in a legible and appropriate font size: (a) the official summary of this Judgment prepared by the Court, once only, in the Official Gazette; (b) the official summary of this Judgment prepared by the Court, once only, in a media outlet of wide national circulation; and (c) this Judgment in its entirety, available for a period of one year, on the websites of the Jury for the Impeachment of Magistrates and of the Public Ministry in a manner accessible to the public and from the home page of the website. The State must inform this Court immediately once it proceeds to make Cf. Case of Reverón Trujillo v. Venezuela, supra, para. 122, and Case of Martínez Esquivia v. Colombia, supra, para. 154. 137 138 Cf. Martínez Esquivia v. Colombia, supra, para. 154. Cf. Case of Cantoral Benavides v. Peru. Reparations and costs. Judgment of December 3, 2001. Series C No. 88, para. 79, and Case of Cortez Espinoza v. Ecuador, supra, para. 169. 139 34