I INTRODUCTION OF THE CASE AND CAUSE OF ACTION 1. The case submitted to the Court. – On May 20, 2021, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the Inter-American Commission” or “the Commission”) submitted to the jurisdiction of the Court the case of Carlos Julio Aguinaga Aillón versus the Republic of Ecuador (hereinafter “the State” or “Ecuador”). According to the Commission, the case addresses a body of violations committed in the framework of the process led by the National Congress, which culminated in the dismissal of Carlos Julio Aguinaga Aillón from his position as member of the Supreme Electoral Tribunal (Tribunal Supremo Electoral de Ecuador, hereinafter “TSE”). The Commission found, more specifically, that through this process, the State had violated the right to judicial guarantees and the right to judicial protection, as well the principles of freedom from ex post facto laws and judicial independence. 2. Proceedings before the Commission. – The following proceedings took place before the Commission: a) Petition. – On May 26, 2005, the representatives of the alleged victim (hereinafter “the representatives) filed the opening petition with the Commission.1 b) Admissibility Report. – The Commission approved Admissibility Report No. 42/13 on July 11, 2013, holding the petition admissible.2 c) Report on the Merits. – The Commission approved its Report on the Merits No. 112/18 (hereinafter “Report on the Merits”) on October 5, 2018, drawing a set of conclusions and extending several recommendations to the State. d) Notification to the State. – The Commission notified the State of the Report on the Merits on November 20, 2018, and granted the State a term of two months to report back on adoption of the recommendations. The State received a total of nine time extensions, after which its request for an additional extension was denied by the Commission. 3. Submission to the Court. – The Commission submitted the case to the Court on May 20, 2021, with the full set of facts and alleged human rights violations.3 It noted that this was necessary to obtain justice and redress for the alleged victim. This Court notes with concern that more than 15 years elapsed after the originating petition was lodged with the Commission, before the case was submitted to the Court. 4. Requests by the Commission. – The Commission asked the Court to adjudge and declare that Ecuador was internationally liable for violating the rights enshrined in Articles 8(1), 8(2)(b), 8(2)(c), 8(2)(h), 9 and 25(1) of the American Convention, read in conjunction with Articles 1(1) and 2 thereof, and order the State to comply with the measures of reparation and recommendations set forth in the report. 1 The alleged victim was represented by Mario Melo Cevallos and Sofia Pazmiño Yánez. 2 The parties were notified of the report on August 14, 2013. The Commission appointed then-Commissioner Antonia Urrejola Noguera as its delegate before the Court. It also named then-Assistant Executive Secretary Marisol Blanchard Vera, Jorge Humberto Meza Flores, and Christian González Chacón as legal advisers. 3 3