- 60 law could be reasonable in order to ensure the independence and impartiality of judges,331 in the actual circumstances of this case, a restriction of this type should not have been applied, because the defense of democracy and the rule of law correspond to the legitimate exercise of a citizen’s political rights. 182. By filing the application for amparo and the criminal complaint, Ms. Flores Lanza revealed her inconformity with what had happened and sought to obtain judicial protection for President Zelaya’s rights. Accordingly, the Court finds that these actions, as well as the comments made by Ms. Flores Lanza, constituted an exercise of her right to freedom of expression and to participate in politics. Consequently, the Court concludes that the disciplinary proceeding against Ms. Flores Lanza, and her subsequent dismissal constituted a violation of Articles 13(1) and 23 of the Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) of this instrument, to her detriment. B.4) Ramón Enrique Barrios Maldonado 183. Mr. Barrios was subjected to a disciplinary proceeding on the basis of a newspaper article that outlined the opinion on the coup d’état that he had given during a university lecture (supra paras. 140 and 141). The Supreme Court of Justice ordered his dismissal (supra paras. 143 to 145), indicating that the dismissal would be “effective on the date that the substitute took office.”332 Nevertheless, this order was not executed. Subsequently, the Judicial Service Council, taking into account the right to freedom of expression, considered that “the investigation carried out by the Inspectorate of Courts and Tribunals […] was insufficient to prove the grounds for his dismissal beyond a reasonable doubt with other evidence.”333 As explained above, the mere existence of a disciplinary proceeding against Mr. Barrios Maldonado based on his statements against the coup d’état, constituted a violation of his rights to participate in politics and to freedom of expression (supra para. 176). Therefore, the Court concludes that the institution of the disciplinary proceeding against him constituted a violation of Articles 13(1) and 23 of the Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) of this instrument, to his detriment. 331 In this regard, the Court notes the existence of a regional consensus as regards the prohibition for judges to practice law. Cf. Argentina (Rules of Procedure for the National Judiciary, articles 8 and 14. Available at: http://www.infoleg.gov.ar/ infolegInternet/anexos/165000-169999/167638/norma.htm); Bolivia (Law of the Judiciary of June 24, 2010, articles 22 and 188. Available at: http://magistratura.organojudicial.gob.bo/index.php/institucion/2013-05-07-16-03-21/finish/3-leyes/1-leydel-organo-judicial); Brazil (Constitution, article 95. Available at: http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/constituicao/ constituicao.htm); Colombia (Statutory Law of the administration of justice of March 15, 1996, article 151. Available at: http://www.alcaldiabogota.gov.co/sisjur/normas/Norma1.jsp?i=6548, and Consolidated Disciplinary Code, article 50. Available at: http://www.procuraduria.gov.co/relatoria/media/file/Codigo_Disciplinario_Unico_2011.pdf); Chile (Organic Code of the Courts, article 316. Available at: http://www.leychile.cl/Navegar?idNorma=25563); Costa Rica (Organic Law of the Judiciary of July 1, 1993, article 9. Available at: https://www.tse.go.cr/pdf/normativa/leyorganicapoderjudicial.pdf); Ecuador (Constitution of the Republic of Ecuador of October 20 2008, articles 109 and 174. Available at: http://www.asambleanacional.gov.ec/ documentos/constitucion_de_bolsillo.pdf); El Salvador (Judicial Service Act of July 12, 1990, articles 24 and 52. Available at: http://www.asamblea.gob.sv/eparlamento/indice-legislativo/buscador-de-documentoslegislativos/ley-de-la-carrera-judicial); Guatemala (Judicial Service Act, articles 29 and 41. Available at: http://www.mingob.gob.gt/images/legislacion/m Ley_de_la_carrera_judicial_Guatemala.pdf); Mexico (Constitution of the United Mexican States, article 101. Available at: http://www.diputados.gob.mx/LeyesBiblio/htm/1.htm); Peru (Judicial Service Act, articles 40(1) and 48. Available at: http://www.oas.org/juridico/PDFs/mesicic4_per_ley29277.pdf); Dominican Republic (Law No. 327-98 of the Judicial Service, articles 44 and 66. Available at: http://ojd.org.do/Normativas/General/Ley%20No.%20327-98,%20sobre%20Carrera% 20Judicial,%20del%2011%20de%20agosto%20de%201998%20G.O.%209994.pdf); Uruguay (Constitution of the Oriental Republic of Uruguay, article 252. Available at: http://www.presidencia.gub.uy/normativa/constitucion-de-la-republica, and Organic Law of the Judiciary and of the Organization of the Courts, article 91. Available at: http://www.parlamento.gub.uy/ leyes/ley15750.htm), and Venezuela (Code of Ethics of the Venezuelan Judge, articles 22 and 33. Available at: http://www.mp.gob.ve/c/document_library/get_file?uuid=949621c5-5d93-436e-b0ac-17a7312faef6&groupId=10136). Also, for example, the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct establish that, “[a] judge shall not practise law whilst the holder of judicial office.” Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct, Principle 4.12. 332 Cf. Note of June 16, 2010, signed by the Secretary General of the Supreme Court of Justice transcribing the dismissal decision of the same date (evidence file, folio 3098). 333 Cf. Decision of the Judicial Service Council of August 24, 2011 (evidence file, folio 3516).