31. On November 18, 2003, the Chamber of Deputies, in Resolution No. 134, “brought charges before the […] Senate” against Justices Carlos Fernández Gadea, Luis Lezcano Claude and Bonifacio Ríos Ávalos, in order to file impeachment proceedings against them. To this end, the Chamber of Deputies invoked article 225 of the Constitution and charged the defendants with different conducts that it categorized as “improper performance” of their functions.41 32. The indictment included 20 cases or charges attributed to the justices. 42 The charges were contained in a document entitled “Statement of reasons,” and Resolution No. 134 established that this document “formed part of the said resolution.”43 The pertinent sections of this “Statement of reasons” relating to the charges based on which Messrs. Fernández Gadea and Ríos Ávalos were impeached are transcribed below:44 Case 1: Declaration of the lifelong appointment [sic] of its own members; violation of the recusal obligations established in the Code of Civil Procedure. […] Judgments [Nos.] 222 and 223, both dated May 5, 2000, delivered by the Supreme Court of Justice decided to admit […] the actions of unconstitutionality filed against Senate Resolution [No.] 421 of November 5, 1999, […]. Case 2: Amendment of the constitutional procedure for the confirmation of judges; interference in functions inherent in another judicial organ. […] In its Judgment [No.] 1033 of December 19, 2001, the [Supreme Court of Justice] […] decided: “[…] to determine the meaning and scope of art. 4 in fine of Law 1634/2000, in the sense that the Judicial Council could not exclude from the slates of candidates a judge who presented his candidacy claiming that he was already confirmed in the position.” […] Case 4: Interference in the exercise of the constitutional functions of the Chamber of Deputies. […] On April 24, 2002, the Chamber of Deputies was advised that the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice had decided in the case: “Action of unconstitutionality against Resolution [No.] 864/2002 of the Chamber of Deputies […] ‘that summons and calls on the Paraguayan Director of the Yacyretá Binational Entity […],’ to issue A.l. [No.] 487 of April 24, 2002, ordering ‘the suspension of the effects of Resolution No. 864/2002…’” [sic]. Case 7: Attribution of constitutional powers expressly reserved to the Legislature, seriously affecting the balance of power established in article 3 of the Constitution and constituting the punishable offense of “attack on the constitutional order” […]. [The Supreme Court of Justice], by Judgment [No.] 979 of September 18, 2002, decided: “[…] to admit […] the action of unconstitutionality filed by the Prosecutor General against article 5 of Law [No.] 1444/99 on the transition period […].” Cf. Resolution No. 134 of the Chamber of Deputies of the National Congress of the Republic of Paraguay of November 18, 2003 (evidence file, volume I, annex 6 to the Merits Report, folios 13 and 14). The resolution appointed an “Indictment Committee” composed of four deputies so that “together, separately, alternatively, indistinctly or successively, and representing the […] Chamber of Deputies, they would prosecute the […] indictment before the […] Senate.” To this end, the Indictment Committee was granted authority “to present briefs, examine documents, file remedies, offer, manage and contest evidence […] and, in sum, undertake any other actions or procedures that were necessary.” 42 During the session of November 26, 2003, the Indictment Committee appointed by the Chamber of Deputies explained to the Senate that cases 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 and 15 corresponded to Justice Carlos Fernández Gadea; cases 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 12, 13, 14 and 15 to Justice Luis Lezcano Claude, and cases 1, 2, 3, 7, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20 to Justice Bonifacio Ríos Avalos. Regarding case 8, the Committee indicated that it corresponded “merely to responsibilities of Justice [Felipe Santiago] Paredes,” who had resigned before the indictment been drawn up. Cf. Transcript of the session of the Senate of the National Congress of the Republic of Paraguay of November 26, 2003 (evidence file, volume V, annex 4.3. to the answering brief, folios 10167, 10176, 10184 and 10191). 43 In that regard, Resolution No. 134 stipulated: “[it is] established that the statement of reasons that accompanies this resolution forms part of it and, consequently, it is hereby ordered that it be forwarded to the Senate, together with the other pertinent background information and documents as an annex and as grounds for the indictment that has been drawn up.” Cf. Resolution No. 134 of the Chamber of Deputies of the National Congress of the Republic of Paraguay of November 18, 2003 (evidence file, volume I, annex 6 to the Merits Report, folios 13 and 14). 44 The transcript includes the cases regarding which the impeachment before the Senate was processed after the Indictment Committee appointed by the Chamber of Deputies had withdrawn several of the cases included in the “Statement of reasons” that formed part of Resolution No. 134 (infra para. 36). Cf. Transcript of the session of the Senate of the National Congress of the Republic of Paraguay of December 3, 2003 (evidence file, volume V, annex 4.5. to the answering brief, folios 10344, 10345 and 10352 to 10356). 41 12