42. In addition, on December 24 and 26 2003, Carlos Fernández Gadea and Bonifacio Ríos Ávalos, respectively, filed actions of unconstitutionality against Resolution No. 134 of December 12, 2003, also issued by the Senate, ordering their removal from their functions as justices of the Supreme Court of Justice.58 D.1. Judgments Nos. 951 and 952 of the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice 43. During the processing of the actions of unconstitutionality, several justices of the Supreme Court of Justice, as well as members of other courts, recused themselves from hearing the arguments.59 44. On December 30, 2009, the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice, composed of three “interim justices […] owing to the recusals of its natural justices,” decided the actions of unconstitutionality. By Judgment No. 951, the Chamber admitted the actions filed by Bonifacio Ríos Ávalos, and by Judgment No. 952, the actions filed by Carlos Fernández Gadea.60 In general, these judgments have the same content. 61 45. In its decision, the Chamber declared “the nullity of the [contested] resolutions” and, “consequently,” ordered the “reinstatement” of Messrs. Ríos Ávalos and Fernández Gadea “in their functions as justices of the […] Supreme Court of Justice of the Republic of Paraguay, who shall immediately occupy any vacanc[ies] that exist […] in the highest organ of the Judiciary.”62 46. Regarding Senate Resolution No. 122, the Constitutional Chamber considered, inter alia: The prohibition to file challenges, recusals, preliminary questions or any type of appeal established in art. 2 of the said administrative resolution of the Senate is a flagrant violation of the defense guarantee to be Cf. Brief filing action of unconstitutionality against Senate Resolution No. 134 of December 12, 2003, submitted by Carlos Fernández Gadea, and Brief filing action of unconstitutionality against Resolution No. 134 of the Senate of December 12, 2003, submitted by Bonifacio Ríos Avalos (evidence file, volume II, procedure before the Commission, folios 398 to 419, and 884 to 903). Among other matters, the presumed victims argued that Resolution No. 134 violated the rights to due process and to defense, and also the lack of independence and impartiality of the organ that removed them from their functions, which had infringed the principle of judicial independence. 59 Cf. Inter alia, recusals of Justices Antonio Fretes and Víctor Núñez Rodríguez, included in the case file of the actions of unconstitutionality filed by Bonifacio Ríos Avalos against Resolutions Nos. 122 and 134 of the Senate of the Republic of Paraguay (evidence file, volume V, annex 8.4. to the answering brief, folios 10723, 10727, 10787, 10917 and 10937), and recusals of Justices Antonio Fretes and Víctor Núñez included in the case file of the actions of unconstitutionality filed by Carlos Fernández Gadea against Resolutions Nos. 122 and 134 of the Senate of the Republic of Paraguay (evidence file, volume V, annex 8.4. to the answering brief, folios 11809, 11851, 12039 and 12063). 60 As each ruling indicates, the actions filed Bonifacio Ríos Avalos were joindered by a judicial decision of August 24, 2007. Meanwhile, the actions filed by Carlos Fernández Gadea were joindered by a judicial decision also issued on August 24, 2007. Cf. Judgment No. 951 of December 30, 2009, delivered by the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Republic of Paraguay, and Judgment No. 952 of December 30, 2009, delivered by the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Republic of Paraguay (evidence file, volume I, annex 10 to the Merits Report, folios 102 and 132). 61 Cf. Judgment No. 951 of December 30, 2009, delivered by the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Republic of Paraguay, and Judgment No. 952 of December 30, 2009, delivered by the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Republic of Paraguay (evidence file, volume I, annex 10 to the Merits Report, folios 84 to 148). 62 Cf. Judgment No. 951 of December 30, 2009, delivered by the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Republic of Paraguay, and Judgment No. 952 of December 30, 2009, delivered by the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Republic of Paraguay (evidence file, volume I, annex 10 to the Merits Report, folios 84 to 148). In these decision, the Chamber also established: “notify […] the […] Finance Minister, for the budgetary effects and the corresponding pension contributions.” 58 15