12 of the federal Commercial and Civil Procedure Code). Therefore, the complaint is rejected (...).”17 37. To challenge that decision, Mr. Mohamed filed a request for revocation with the same Supreme Court.18 On October 19, 1995, the Court resolved: “Whereas: In this case the well-known doctrine that the Court’s judgments are final and irrevocable applies (…) The motion is therefore denied.”19 38. Mr. Mohamed was fired from his job as a bus driver on July 17, 1995, in the following terms: “Due to criminal loss of driving privilege. Work contract terminated. Your fault.”20 39. Decree 692/92, which establishes the Traffic and Transportation Regulations, entered into force on April 27, 2002.21 V. ANALYSIS OF LAW A. Oscar Alberto Mohamed’s right with respect to the principle of legality. (Article 9, in connection with Article 1.1 of the American Convention) 40. Article 9 of the American Convention establishes that: No one shall be convicted of any act or omission that did not constitute a criminal offense, under the applicable law, at the time it was committed. A heavier penalty shall not be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the criminal offense was committed. If subsequent to the commission of the offense the law provides for the imposition of a lighter punishment, the guilty person shall benefit therefrom. 41. The petitioners allege that the Appeals Court verdict that convicted Mr. Mohamed of negligent homicide violated the principle of legality recognized in Article 9 of the American Convention, because the decision was based on a violation of Articles 37, 39, and 40 of Decree 692/92 to regulate traffic and transportation, which was approved on April 27, 1992, after the traffic accident that occurred on March 16, 1992. 42. The State, for its part, argues that the conviction was not based on the cited articles of the regulations, but on Article 84 of the Criminal Code, which establishes a norm of objective care that was fully in force at the time of the facts. Moreover, the State says that at the time of the facts Decree 12.689/45 was in force, which establishes the same traffic obligations as Decree 692/92. 43. The Inter-American Court has stated that: Under the rule of law, the principles of legality and non-retroactivity govern the actions of all the State’s bodies in their respective fields, particularly when the exercise of its 517 Petitioners’ note of April 1, 1996. Annex, Judgment on the complaint motion delivered by the Supreme Court on September 19 1995. 618 Petitioners’ note of April 1, 1996. 719 Petitioners’ note of April 1, 1996. Annex, Judgment on the appeal for revocation delivered by the Supreme Court on October 19, 1995. 820 Petitioners’ note of June 25, 1996.. Annex: telegram of July 17, 1995, notifying Mr. Mohamed of his dismissal. 921 Petitioners’ note of April 1, 1996, and the State’s note of October 24, 1996. Annex. Text of Decree 696/92.