6 Under such procedure, "will be called other lawyers as members, who shall be appointed, in each case, by the remaining Court´s members" 3. In that regard, the Commission notes that the SCJ, which lack of impartiality due to its institutional position in the context has been challenged by the petitioners and is accredited in this merit report, would be in charge of the appointment of the substitutes. 2. Regarding the articles alleged by the representatives that were not pointed out on the admissibility report 70/11 25. The Commission in its admissibility report did not rule on the alleged violation of articles 7, 9, and 23 of the Convention, which were alleged by the petitioners at the merits stage. The Commission notes that the facts that support those allegations are integral and inseparable part of the case and also arising from the information and documents submitted by the parties during the proceedings before the Commission. The IACHR notes that during the procedure, the State knew the facts on which the allegations were based and had the opportunity to offer their comments. Accordingly, the Commission based on the principle of jura novit curia, taking into account that the state has had the opportunity to know the claims and the need to maintain consistency between other cases with similar situations, will make conclusions on the matter. VI. 1. Context The coup d’état in Honduras 26. As the Commission wrote in its report titled Honduras: Human Rights and Coup d´État,4 at 5:00 a.m. on June 28, 2009, heavily armed troops of the Honduran Army stormed the presidential residence and took President José Manuel Zelaya Rosales into custody. The President was then taken to an air base and from there was flown to Costa Rica aboard a military aircraft. That same day, the National Congress ordered President Manuel Zelaya Rosales’ removal from the office of President and designated the President of the National Congress as President of the Republic until the presidential elections held in November 2009.5 Subsequent to the coup d’état, it was reported that the SCJ had ordered the arrest of President Zelaya in connection with a legal case for alleged commission of crimes involving treason, abuse of authority and usurpation of powers to the detriment of the government and State of Honduras.6 27. The factor triggering the coup d’état was related to a political controversy concerning a popular consultation that the President was planning for the elections in November 2009,7 to give the 3 Law on the Organization, Functions and Authorities of the Courts. Available in spanish at: http://www.poderjudicial.gob.hn/juris/Leyes/Ley%20de%20Organización%20y%20Atribuciones%20de%20los%20Tribunales%2 0(actualizada-07).pdf 4 IACHR, Honduras: Human Rights and Coup d’état. OEA/Ser.L/V/II. Doc. 55. December 30, 2009. Availbable at: http://www.cidh.org/countryrep/Honduras09eng/Toc.htm 5 IACHR, Honduras: Human Rights and Coup d’état. OEA/Ser.L/V/II. Doc. 55. December 30, 2009, paragraph 77. 6 IACHR, Honduras: Human Rights and Coup d’état. OEA/Ser.L/V/II. Doc. 55. December 30, 2009, paragraphs 73-87. During its on-site visit, the Commission did not receive any information concerning the origin of the order to deport the President but did get information to the effect that the order to arrest the President had allegedly not yet been issued at the time the President was taken into custody. 7 IACHR, Honduras: Human Rights and Coup d’état. OEA/Ser.L/V/II. Doc. 55. December 30, 2009, paragraphs 83-84.