purpose of analyzing this case, the relevant guarantees are those established in Articles 8(1), 8(2), and 9 of the American Convention. 61. In addition to the punitive aspect, it is relevant to lay out some general considerations about reinforced guarantees in cases involving the dismissal of prosecutors. 62. The principle of the independence of justice operators is an essential requirement in a democratic system and a condition sine qua non for the protection of human rights.30 It is enshrined as one of the due process guarantees protected by Article 8(1) of the American Convention; that principle, in turn, gives rise to “reinforced” guarantees31 which the States must provide judges to ensure their independence.32 The bodies of the inter-American system have interpreted the principle of independence in the sense of incorporating the following guarantees: a proper appointment process, tenure in the position, and a guarantee against external pressures.33 63. The Commission reiterates that States should ensure that all persons who exercise duties as justice operators, including prosecutors, have reinforced guarantees of tenure, understanding that, with the exception of serious disciplinary offenses, employment security should be respected in line with the time period or conditions established in the appointment. 64. In view of the parties’ positions and the facts that have been established, and taking these general considerations into account, the Commission will undertake a legal analysis in the following order: i) the right to a competent, independent, and impartial tribunal (Article 8(1) of the Convention); ii) the right of defense and the principle of consistency (Article 8(2)(c) and (f) of the Convention); iii) the right to duly reasoned decisions, the principle of legality, and the right to freedom of expression (Articles 8(1), 9, and 13 of the Convention); iv) the right to appeal the judgment to a higher court and the right to judicial protection (Articles 8(2)(h) and 25 of the Convention); and v) the right to participate in government (Article 23 of the Convention). 2. The right to a competent, independent, and impartial tribunal34 65. Article 8(1) of the Convention establishes the right to a hearing “by a competent…tribunal…previously established by law.” Hence, “everyone shall have the right to be tried by ordinary courts or tribunals using established legal procedures. Tribunals that do not use the duly established procedures of the legal process shall not be created to displace the jurisdiction belonging to the ordinary courts or judicial tribunals.” The aim here is to avoid trials in special or ad hoc tribunals.35 IACHR, Report on the Merits 12.816, Report No. 103/13, November 5, 2013, para. 112, citing United Nations, Human Rights Committee, General Comment No. 32, CCPR/C/GC/32, August 23, 2007, para.19. Along these lines, see I/A Court H.R., Habeas corpus in Emergency Situations (Arts. 27(2), 25(1) and 7(6) American Convention on Human Rights), Advisory Opinion OC-8/87 of January 30, 1987, Series A No. 8, para. 30. See also IACHR, Democracy and Human Rights in Venezuela, Chapter III, Independence and Separation of Public Powers, December 30, 2009, para. 180. 31 I/A Court H.R., Case of Reverón Trujillo v. Venezuela, Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations, and Costs, Judgment of June 30, 2009, Series C No. 197, para. 67; IACHR, Democracy and Human Rights in Venezuela, Chapter III, Independence and Separation of Public Powers, December 30, 2009, para. 85; IACHR, Second Report on the Situation of Human Rights Defenders in the Americas, December 31, 2011, para. 359. 32 Thus, for example, the Inter-American Court has indicated that the State’s obligations to parties before the courts give rise, in turn, to “rights for the judges”; among other things, the Court has noted that “the guarantee that they will not be subject to a discretional removal implies that the disciplinary and punishing processes of judges must necessarily respect the guarantees of…due process and shall offer those affected an effective remedy.” I/A Court H.R., Case of Reverón Trujillo v. Venezuela, Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations, and Costs, Judgment of June 30, 2009, Series C No. 197, para. 147. 33 IACHR, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.Doc. 44, Guarantees for the Independence of Justice Operators: Towards Strengthening Access to Justice and the Rule of Law in the Americas, December 5, 2013, paras. 56, 109, and 184; I/A Court H.R., Case of López Lone et al. v. Honduras, Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations, and Costs, Judgment of October 5, 2015, Series C No. 302, para. 191. 34 Article 8(1) of the Convention establishes the following: “Every person has the right to a hearing, with due guarantees and within a reasonable time, by a competent, independent, and impartial tribunal, previously established by law, in the substantiation of any accusation of a criminal nature made against him or for the determination of his rights and obligations of a civil, labor, fiscal, or any other nature.” 35 I/A Court H.R., Case of Barreto Leiva v. Venezuela. Merits, Reparations, and Costs, Judgment of November 17, 2009, Series C No. 206, para. 75. 30 12