however, these powers cannot be exercised without full respect for the guarantees of due process and judicial protection, because, to the contrary, those affected could be subjected to arbitrary acts.”113 102. As regards the guarantees of due process in the context of the collective dismissals in Peru during the 1990s, the Court considered that it had been demonstrated that the independence and impartiality of the Constitutional Court, as a democratic institution guaranteeing the rule of law, were undermined by the removal of some of its justices.114 The Court added that that impeded the possibility of exercising the control of constitutionality and the consequent examination of the compatibility of the State’s conduct with the Constitution.115 The Inter-American court concluded that the above “resulted in a general situation of absence of guarantees and the ineffectiveness of the courts to deal with facts such as those of the instant case, as well as the consequent lack of confidence in these institutions at the time.”116 Finally, the Court found that as a result of the lack of effective access to judicial protection whereby the competent authorities might make the pertinent decisions, the victims found themselves in a situation of “defenselessness and uncertainty.”117 103. In ruling on the effects of the interference in the composition of the Constitutional Court for the victims of the Case of the Dismissed Congressional Employees v. Peru, the Inter-American Court said the following: On May 28, 1997, the Congress in plenary session, dismissed the following Constitutional Court justices: Manuel Aguirre Roca, Guillermo Rey Terry and Delia Revoredo Marsano. On November 17, 2000, Congress annulled the dismissal resolutions and reinstated them in their posts. In another case, this Court has verified that, while this destitution lasted, the Constitutional Court “was dismantled and disqualified from exercising its jurisdiction appropriately, particularly with regard to controlling constitutionality […] and the consequent examination of whether the State’s conduct was in harmony with the Constitution.118 104. The Commission highlights that in the Enapu, Minedu, and MEF cases, the actions for constitutional relief were taken up by the Constitutional Court in the context established in the previous paragraph, this is, at a time when its membership consisted of four justices, owing to the fact that the Congress had removed the other three justices of said tribunal.119 105. In addition, in its Second Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Peru the IACHR noted that following the interruption of the democratic and constitutional order on April 5, 1992, several reforms were undertaken of the judiciary that undermined its independence and autonomy, particularly where matters with a bearing on the interests of the executive branch were concerned. The IACHR noted that more than 80% of Peruvian judges were provisional appointees who could be dismissed or removed from office 113 I/A Court H.R., Case of the Dismissed Congressional Employees (Aguado-Alfaro et al.) Judgment of November 24, 2006. Series C No. 158, par. 110. 114 I/A Court H.R., Case of the Dismissed Congressional Employees (Aguado-Alfaro et al.) Judgment of November 24, 2006. Series C No. 158, par. 108. 115 I/A Court H.R., Case of the Dismissed Congressional Employees (Aguado-Alfaro et al.) Judgment of November 24, 2006. Series C No. 158, par. 109. 116 I/A Court H.R., Case of the Dismissed Congressional Employees (Aguado-Alfaro et al.) Judgment of November 24, 2006. Series C No. 158, par. 109. 117 I/A Court H.R., Case of the Dismissed Congressional Employees (Aguado-Alfaro et al.) v. Peru. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of November 24, 2006. Series C No. 158, par. 150. 118 I/A Court H.R., Case of the Dismissed Congressional Employees (Aguado-Alfaro et al.) Judgment of November 24, 2006. Series C No. 158, par. 89.27, which cites the Case of the Constitutional Court v. Peru. Competence. Judgment of September 24, 1999. Series C No. 55, par. 112. 119 I/A Court H.R., Case of the Dismissed Congressional Employees (Aguado-Alfaro et al.) Judgment of November 24, 2006. Series C No. 158, par. 89.27, which cites the Case of the Constitutional Court v. Peru. Competence. Judgment of September 24, 1999. Series C No. 55, par. 112. 21