been overturned on appeal or review by a higher judicial body. 38 Similarly, it considered that the State failed in its duty to provide reasons for the penalty of dismissal from office, because it did not analyze whether or not the inexcusable judicial error constituted a disciplinary offense. 39 29. In relation to the victims’ request for evidence for the purpose of clarifying a decisive aspect of the case, the Inter-American Court considered that the disciplinary body, at the very least, should have ruled by allowing or denying that request for evidence or even by ordering the parties to submit such evidence. 40 30. In the Case of Reverón Trujillo v. Venezuela, the Inter-American Court considered the arbitrary dismissal from office of a provisional judge, on February 6, 2002. On October 13, 2004 the Political-Administrative Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice ordered the annulment of the act of dismissal, considering that it was not lawful, but it did not order the alleged victim’s reinstatement in office, or the payment of the salaries and social benefits she did not receive. 31. In this case, the Inter-American Court pointed out that judges, unlike other public officials, enjoy strengthened guarantees so as to ensure the necessary independence of the judiciary. It reiterated the importance of judicial independence for the separation of powers, and for the State’s obligation to guarantee both the institutional aspect of the judicial power as a system, and also in connection with its individual aspect, that is, with regard to the specific judge as an individual. 41 32. The Court also emphasized the guarantees derived from judicial independence: an appropriate appointment process, tenure in office and guarantees against external pressures. 42 It recalled that the authority in charge of the process for the dismissal of judges must act independently and impartially in the proceedings established for that purpose and allow the exercise of the right of defense. 43 Tenure in office is a guarantee of judicial independence which, in turn, is comprised of the following guarantees: continuance in office, an appropriate system of promotion and no unjustified dismissal or discretionary removal. 44 Furthermore, the guarantee of tenure must allow for the reinstatement of a judge who has been arbitrarily removed from office. 45 This does not mean to say that provisional or temporary judges should have unlimited tenure in office, but rather that they should be guaranteed a certain stability in their positions. 46 In other words, they must have security of tenure during a particular period in order to protect them from the pressures of different sectors. 47 38 Ibid. para. 84. 39 Ibid. paras. 86 and 91. 40 Ibid. para. 94. 41 Case Reverón Trujillo v. Venezuela. Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of June 30, 2009. Series C No. 197, para. 67. 42 Ibid. para. 70. 43 Ibid. para. 78. 44 Ibid. para. 79. 45 Ibid. para. 81. 46 Ibid. paras. 115 and 116. 47 Ibid. para. 117. 8