2) Luis Fernando Torres, who testified on: (i) the presumed events that occurred in the National Congress in relation to the removal of the members of the Constitutional Tribunal; (ii) how the alleged impeachment was conducted; the summons, and the composition of the parliamentary majority; (iii) the reasons given by the members of Congress during the sessions, and (iv) the supposed motives and reasons of Congress for the alleged removal, and the resolutions C) Expert witness offered by the representatives 3) Alejandro Ponce Villacís, who testified on international standards for judicial independence, the scope of the rights involved in the case, and the guarantees of the judiciary, in relation to the facts of this case. D) Expert witnesses offered by the State 4) Luis Ávila Linzán, who testified on: (i) the Constitutional Tribunal and the Constitutional Court; (ii) the institutional and juridical evolution in the case of Ecuador from a critical perspective; (iii) the historical context; (iv) the juridical, social and political nature of the Constitutional Tribunal in Ecuador; (v) the Constitutional Control Act and the Organic Law on Jurisdictional Guarantees and Constitutional Control, and (vi) the powers of the Constitutional Tribunal of Ecuador and the pertinent constitutional powers of the Constitutional Court of Ecuador in relation to this case. 5) Pablo Alarcón Peña, who testified on: (i) the evolution of jurisdictional guarantees in Ecuador; (ii) the changes in the jurisdictional guarantees established in the 1998 Constitution of Ecuador in comparison with the 2008 Constitution of the Republic of Ecuador; (iii) the change in the nature of guarantees (from precautionary to hearing proceedings, informal proceedings, competence, emergence of integral reparation), and (iv) the actual role of the Constitutional Court of Ecuador in relation to jurisdictional guarantees. 30. Regarding the evidence provided during the public hearing, the Court received the testimony of: A) Presumed victim proposed by the representatives 1) Oswaldo Cevallos Bueno, who testified on: (i) the presumed facts of the case, in particular the alleged way in which they were prosecuted and the manner in which he has experienced his dismissal; (ii) the alleged personal effects he suffered and continues to suffer owing to the presumed violation of his human rights, and (iii) how he would possibly feel should he receive redress if the Court declared the violation of his rights. B) Witness proposed by the representatives 2) Wilfrido Lucero, who testified on: (i) the presumed events that occurred in the National Congress in relation to the removal of the members of the Constitutional Tribunal; (ii) how the alleged impeachment was conducted; the summons, and the composition of the parliamentary majority; (iii) the reasons given by the members of Congress during the sessions, and (iv) the supposed motives and reasons of Congress for the alleged removal and the resolutions. 12