Considerations of the Court 271. From the arguments presented by the Commission and the representatives, the Court notes that there are disputes with regard to the laws that are currently in force in Ecuador concerning the selection, appointment, and tenure of the judges in the Judiciary and the impact that this could have on judicial independence. In this regard, article 90 of the Code on the Organization of the Judiciary (in force since March 9, 2009), establishes the right of the members of the Judiciary to “stability in their positions or functions,” stipulating that they “may only be removed, suspended or dismissed from the exercise of their functions pursuant to the law.”300 272. In addition, regarding the situation of the judges of the Constitutional Court, the Court observes that article 431 of the 2008 Constitution indicates that: “The members of the Constitutional Court shall not be subject to impeachment and may not be removed by those who appoint them. However, they shall be subject to the same controls as the rest of the public authorities and shall respond for any other acts or omissions they commit in the exercise of their functions. Without prejudice to civil liability, in the case of criminal liability, they shall only be charged by the Prosecutor General and tried by the plenary of the National Court of Justice and, to this end, the affirmative vote of two-thirds of its members shall be required. Their removal shall be decided by two-thirds of the members of the Constitutional Court. The procedure, requirements, and grounds shall be determined by law.” 273. Article 186 of the Organic Law on Jurisdictional Guarantees and Constitutional Control, which entered into force on September 21, 2009,301 establishes that “the judges of the Constitutional Court, are subject [to a] special regime of responsibilities,” in which: “1. The judges of the Constitutional Court may not be subjected to impeachment by the National Assembly, or be removed by the authorities who intervened in their appointment. 2. Without prejudice to civil liability, criminal liability for punishable acts committed during and on the occasion of the functions exercised in the Judiciary, shall be subject to complaint, investigation, and charges only and exclusively by the Prosecutor General, and to trial by the plenary of the National Court of Justice with the affirmative vote of two-thirds of its members; except for matters that are related to opinions, rulings, and votes issued in the exercise of their office, in which case, they shall not be subject to criminal liability. 3. Removal shall be decided by the plenary of the Constitutional Court with the affirmative vote of two-thirds of its members.” 274. Article 181 of the Organic Code of the Judicial Function establishes that: “The members of the Constitutional Court shall be tried by the plenary of the national Court of Justice, with the vote of two-thirds of its members, in case of criminal offenses, following charges brought by the Prosecutor General. To this end, a judge shall conduct the preliminary investigation, the instruction of the prosecution, and the intermediary stage, and the Plenary shall deliver the decisions and judgments established in the Code of Criminal Procedure, pursuant to the instructions issued to this end.”302 275. The Court recalls that Article 2 of the Convention obliges the States Parties to adopt, pursuant to their constitutional procedures and the provisions of the Convention, the legislative or other measures necessary to ensure that the rights and freedoms protected by 300 Cf. Case of the Supreme Court of Justice (Quintana Coello et al.) v. Ecuador, para. 219. 301 Cf. Organic Law on Jurisdictional Guarantees and Constitutional Control (file of annexes to the answering brief, tome I, folios 3552 to 3607). 302 Organic Code of the Judicial Function. Official gazette, Supplement 544 of March 9, 2009 (file of annexes to the answering brief of the case of the Supreme Court of Justice (Quintana Coello et al.), tome I, folio 3585). 79