should this time frame expire, it was considered that they had lost the right to submit the motion of censure and that the proceeding had concluded. 70. The motion of censure commenced when the accusation proceeding had concluded with the submission or proposal of the motion by the legislators who had filed the charges.77 Once the motion had been proposed, “the Speaker of the National Congress or his deputy [would] indicate the date and time of the session during which the debate [would] start that [would] conclude with the respective vote. This date c[ould] not be less than five days or more than ten days from the date on which the motion of censure was proposed and if the National Congress was not sitting in an regular session, it [would] be called to a special session within no more than thirty days”78 (bold added). This special period could be prolonged for sixty days more by the Speaker of the National Congress at the written request of ten members of Congress.79 71. Once the foregoing procedure had been completed, on the pre-established date and time, the impeached official could exercise his right of defense, in person, before the National Congress for a maximum time of eight hours. Subsequently, “the legislators who ha[d] filed the charges and who ha[d] presented the respective motion of censure, ha[d] to substantiate their accusations for two hours each, in the chronological order in which they had proposed the motion of censure. Then, the impeached official could respond for a maximum of four hours.”80 72. Once the impeached official’s formal intervention before the National Congress had concluded, he would withdraw from the room, so that the Speaker of the National Congress could open the debate in which all the legislators could participate and expound their arguments for 20 minutes each. This procedure ended with the closure of the final discussions and, then, the Speaker would “order that a nominal vote be taken for or against the censure. The motion of censure [was] considered approved with an absolute majority of the total number of members of the National Congress.”81 73. According to subparagraphs 9, 10 and 11 of article 130 of the 1998 Constitution, the effects of the adoption of the motion of censure were as follows: 82 (i) the immediate removal of the official; (ii) if the censure provided evidence of the criminal liability of the official, a decision would be taken to refer the matter to be heard by the competent judge, and (iii) in the cases in which the appointments had been the result of slates, slates for the vacancy in the position should be presented within the following 20 days and, if the said slates were not received within this period, Congress would proceed to make the appointments without them. 77 Cf. Article 91 of the Law on the Organization of the Legislative Function of Ecuador (file of annexes to the answering brief, tome I, folio 3640). 78 Article 92 of the Law on the Organization of the Legislative Function of Ecuador (file of annexes to the answering brief, tome I, folio 3640). 79 Cf. Article 93 of the Law on the Organization of the Legislative Function of Ecuador (file of annexes to the answering brief, tome I, folio 3640). 80 Article 94 of the Law on the Organization of the Legislative Function of Ecuador (file of annexes to the answering brief, tome I, folio 3640). 81 Articles 94 and 95 of the Law on the Organization of the Legislative Function of Ecuador (file of annexes to the answering brief, tome I, folio 3640). 82 Cf. 1998 Constitution of the Republic of Ecuador, article 130 (file of annexes to the answering brief, tome I, folio 3681). 24