71 146. As established by the proven facts (supra para. 124(51), 124(57) and 124(61)), the Supreme Electoral Council, the Civil and Labor Chamber of the Court of Appeal of the North Atlantic District, Puerto Cabezas, and the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice adopted decisions concerning the participation of the YATAMA candidates in the municipal elections of November 2000. 1) Application of Article 8(1) as regards decisions of the Supreme Electoral Council 147. Article 8 of the American Convention applies to all the requirements that should be observed by the procedural bodies, whatsoever they may be, so that a person may defend himself adequately against any act of the State that could affect his rights.141 148. According to the provisions of Article 8(1) of the Convention, when determining a person’s rights and obligations of a criminal, civil, labor, fiscal or any other nature, “due guarantees” must be observed that ensure the right to due process, in accordance with the corresponding procedure. 149. All the organs that exercise functions of a substantially jurisdictional nature have the obligation to adopt just decisions based on full respect for the guarantee of due process established in Article 8 of the American Convention.142 Article 8(1) of the Convention, which alludes to the right of every person to a hearing by a “competent judge or tribunal” for the “determination of his rights,” is also applicable in situations in which a public rather than a judicial authority issues decisions that affect the determination of such rights,143 as occurred in the instant case. 150. The decisions issued by domestic bodies with regard to electoral matters may affect the enjoyment of political rights. Consequently, in this sphere also, the minimum guarantees established in Article 8(1) of the Convention must be observed, to the extent that they are applicable in the respective proceeding. In this case, it should be taken into account that the electoral procedure preceding the municipal elections calls for promptness and a simple process that facilitates decision-making within the framework of the electoral calendar. The Supreme Electoral Council should respect the specific guarantees provided for in Electoral Act No. 331 of 2000, which regulates the election process for mayors, deputy mayors and councilors. 151. The decisions issued by the Supreme Electoral Council had a direct effect on the exercise of the right to political participation of the persons proposed by the YATAMA party to participate in the municipal elections of November 2000, because they were decisions that denied their registration as candidates and the possibility of being elected to specific public positions. Nicaraguan laws have assigned functions of a substantially jurisdictional nature to the Supreme Electoral Council. Indeed, the State, 141 Cf. Case of Ivcher Bronstein. Judgment of February 6, 2001. Series C No. 74, para. 102; Case of Baena Ricardo et al. Judgment of February 2, 2001. Series C No. 72, para. 124; Case of the Constitutional Court. Judgment of January 31, 2001. Series C No. 71, para. 69; and Judicial Guarantees in States of Emergency (Arts. 27(2), 25 and 8 American Convention on Human Rights). Advisory Opinion OC-9/87 of October 6, 1987. Series A No. 9, para. 27. 142 Cf. Case of Ivcher Bronstein, supra note 141, para. 104; and Case of the Constitutional Court, supra note 141, para. 71. 143 Cf. Case of Ivcher Bronstein, supra note 141, para. 105; and Case of the Constitutional Court, supra note 141, para. 71.