Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the Inter-American Commission” or “the Commission”) submitted to the jurisdiction of the Inter-American Court (hereinafter “submission brief”), the case of “Miguel Camba Campos et al. (Members of the Constitutional Tribunal)” against the Republic of Ecuador (hereinafter “the State” or “Ecuador”), concerning “the arbitrary termination of eight members of the Constitutional Tribunal of Ecuador by a decision of the National Congress of November 25, 2004,” and the processing of impeachment proceedings against some of the members, during which the presumed victims “had no procedural guarantees and were not given the opportunity to defend themselves in relation to the termination, […] and had no procedural guarantees [with regard to the] impeachment.” The Commission also indicated that “the [presumed] victims were arbitrarily and unreasonably prevented from filing amparo remedies against the termination decision and did not have access to an effective remedy for challenging the arbitrariness of the National Congress.” 2. Proceedings before the Commission. The proceedings before the Commission were as follows: a) Petition. On February 23, 2005, Miguel Camba Campos and another seven former members of the Constitutional Tribunal of Ecuador lodged the initial petition before the Commission; b) Admissibility Report. On February 27, 2007, the Commission approved Admissibility Report No. 5/07;1 c) Merits Report. On July 22, 2011, the Commission approved Merits Report No. 99/11,2 under Article 50 of the Convention (hereinafter also “the Merits Report” or “Report No. 99/11”), in which it established: a. Conclusions. The Commission concluded that the State was “responsible for violating the rights to a fair trial, to freedom from ex post facto laws, and to judicial protection, enshrined in Articles 8, 9 and 25 of the American Convention, in relation to the obligations set out in Articles 1(1) and 2 thereof, with respect to Miguel Camba Campos, Oswaldo Cevallos Bueno, Enrique Herrería Bonnet, Jaime Nogales Izurieta, Luis Rojas Bajaña, Mauro Terán Cevallos, Simón Zabala Guzmán and Manuel Jaramillo Córdova.” b. Recommendations. The Commission recommended: 1(a) Reinstate the victims in the judiciary, in positions similar to those they had held, with the same remuneration, social benefits, and a rank comparable to that they would hold today if their functions had not been terminated, for the period of time that remained in their terms, or (b) If, for well-founded reasons, reinstatement is not possible, the State shall pay reasonable compensation to the victims or, if applicable, their heirs, taking into account the non-pecuniary harm caused. 2. Pay the victims the salaries, pensions, employment and/or social benefits they failed to receive from the time of their termination up to the date on which their terms would have ended. 1 In this report, the Commission “concluded that the […] case is admissible and that it is competent to examine the claim lodged by the petitioners in relation to the presumed violation of Articles 8, 9 and 25 of the American Convention, in relation to its Articles 1(1) and 2.” In addition, the Commission indicated that, “if true, the facts alleged by the petitioners would not constitute possible violations of Articles 23 or 24 of the American Convention.” Cf. Admissibility Report No. 5/07, Petition 161-05, Miguel Camba Campos et al. (Members of the Constitutional Tribunal), Ecuador, February 27, 2007 (file of annexes to the report, tome IV, folios 1735 to 1745). 2 Merits Report No. 99/11, Case 12,596, Miguel Camba Campos et al. “Members of the Constitutional Tribunal”, Ecuador, July 22, 2011 (merits file, tome I, folios 9 to 45). 4