15. In the dismissal, the right to due process, political rights, and the right to work are connected. It is not possible to understand the violations in isolation, as their division does not reflect the joint violation that exists in the case, regardless of whether they involve civil and political rights or economic, social, cultural, and environmental rights (ESCER). 16. In this way, Mina Cuero's dismissal was determined through a procedure in which due process guarantees were violated, and, in turn, there was a violation of his right to job stability. IV.PRINCIPLE OF NE BIS IN IDEM 17. Regarding the violation of the principle of ne bis in idem, the Court establishes that: 97. In the instant case, according to the resolution of the Disciplinary Court that imposed the dismissal sanction on the alleged victim, it was alleged that the victim committed the disciplinary infractions established in sections 5 and 26 of Article 64 of the National Police Discipline Regulations, which regulated: Article 64. They constitute serious or third-class offenses: [...] 5. Those who commit any act that reveals a lack of consideration and respect towards a superior, whether within or outside of service; [...] 26. Engaging in acts of manifest violence or insubordination against a superior, provided that the act does not constitute a crime; [...]. 98. Furthermore, the aggravating circumstances contained in sections (c), (d), and (m) of Article 30 of the same Regulation were applied to Mr. Mina Cuero, which established: Article 30. For the same purposes of grading the disciplinary sanction, the following are aggravating circumstances: [...] (c) That the act was carried out in the presence of personnel, in such a way that it can be considered a bad example in maintaining order and discipline; (d) Being a repeat offender in committing offenses in relation to time and seriousness; [...] and (m) Any other circumstance that, in the judgment of the superior, increases the seriousness of the offense or suggests the dangerousness of the sanctioned person. 103. Moreover, the Court warns that the lack of specification regarding which previous sanctions were considered and applied as aggravating circumstances, as well as the imposition of the most severe possible sanction, shows a departure from the duty of to provide legal reasoning, which also constituted a violation of the principle of ne bis in idem, since the aggravating circumstance contained in section (c) of Article 30 of the National Police Discipline Regulations, which refers to the act being "carried out in the presence of personnel," was applied, taking into account for this aggravating circumstance the same conduct that was subject to reproach, namely the lack of respect towards other members of the police institution. 18. International treaties incorporate the principle of ne bis in idem, in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 7 states: "No one shall be liable to be tried or punished again for an offense for which they have already been convicted or acquitted in accordance with the law and penal procedure of each country." The American Convention on Human Rights stipulates in Article 8, paragraph (4): "An accused person acquitted by a nonappealable judgment shall not be subjected to a new trial for the same cause." The Rome Statute establishes it in Article 20. 5