- 27 application of [the Judicial Service Act], and of the admissible appeals filed against the decisions of the Personnel Management Directorate.”121 80. In addition, the Personnel Management Directorate is “the executive body responsible for applying [the Judicial Service Act]” The Head of the Directorate is appointed by the Supreme Court of Justice.122 81. Lastly, the Supreme Court carries out judicial oversight through the General Inspectorate of Courts, which is regulated by the rules of procedure of the General Inspectorate of Courts.123 The Inspector General, responsible for the General Inspectorate of Courts, and the other inspectors are appointed by the Supreme Court of Justice “after they have passed a public competition.”124 B.3) The proceeding for removing judges in Honduras 82. The Judicial Service Act establishes that: “[t]he sanction of dismissal may only be applied by means of summary information and a hearing of the person concerned, carrying out the pertinent investigations and obtaining the necessary evidence. The dismissal is final when any appeals filed by the defendant have been exhausted and decided.”125 According to the Regulations governing the Judicial Service Act the initial decision corresponded to the Personnel Management Directorate.126 However, according to the Constitution in force and the Law on the Organization and Faculties of the Courts, this provision was not applied because it corresponded to the Supreme Court to remove judges or justices, at the proposal of the Judicial Service Council (supra para. 77). It is on record that, in the case of the presumed victims, it was the Supreme Court of Justice that removed the judges and justice, at the proposal of the Personnel Management Directorate.127 This was not contemplated in either the Constitution or the Judicial Service Act or its Regulations; rather it 121 Judicial Service Act, article 9(e) (evidence file, folios 4152 and 4153). 122 Cf. Judicial Service Act, article 10 (evidence file, folio 4153). 123 According to the Law on the Organization and Faculties of the Courts, the Supreme Court of Justice was responsible for judicial oversight and this was carried out through the General Inspectorate of Courts. Cf. Law on the Organization and Faculties of the Courts, article 85. Available at: http://www.poderjudicial.gob.hn/CEDIJ/Leyes/Documents/LEY%20DE%20ORGANIZACI %C3%93N%20Y%20ATRIBUCIONES%20DE%20LOS%20TRIBUNALES%20%28ACTUALIZADA-07%29.pdf, and Rules of procedure of the General Inspectorate of Courts, article 2. Available at: http://www.poderjudicial.gob.hn/transparencia/regulacion/Documents/Reglamento%20de%20la%20Inspector%C3%ADa%2 0General%20de%20Tribunales.pdf 124 The General Inspectorate of Courts is composed of the General Inspectorate, the Regional Inspectorates and the Inspectorates of Courts and Tribunals. Cf. Rules of procedure of the General Inspectorate of Courts, Articles 4, 5, 14 and 15. Available at: http://www.poderjudicial.gob.hn/transparencia/regulacion/Documents/Reglamento%20de%20la%20Inspector%C3%ADa%2 0General%20de%20Tribunales.pdf 125 Judicial Service Act, article 65 (evidence file, folio 4168). In this regard, the Regulations add “Article 188: The sanction of dismissal […] shall […] only be applied by means of prior summary information, and after the person concerned has provided explanations and answered the charges during a hearing, the pertinent investigations have been made, and the corresponding evidence obtained. To this end, the Personnel Management Directorate, itself or though the senior official to whom it has delegated this function, shall summon the employee in writing, determining the charges of which he is accused, so that he may appear at the place, on the date and at the time the hearing will be held. The employee may provide the evidence he considers necessary or request that this be obtained. Once the foregoing has concluded, the Directorate, or the Head of the unit hearing the case, shall report on the results, in a record prepared for this purpose, which shall be signed by all those present. Should anyone refuse to sign, this will be recorded in the said document. The Personnel Management Directorate shall take the final decision on whether or not to ratify the disciplinary sanction announced to the employee, notifying its decision to the person concerned in writing. The dismissal shall be final once the appeal filed by the defendant have been exhausted and decided.” Cf. Regulations governing the Judicial Service Act, article 190 (evidence file, folio 201). 126 127 Cf. Regulations governing the Judicial Service Act, article 188 (evidence file, folio 201). The representatives and the State agree on this. Cf. Brief with pleadings and evidence, and answering brief (merits file, folios 344 and 719).