71 sufficiency of the evidence considered by the A quo in order to issue the arrest warrant against the petitioner, thus resulting insufficient to that effect the pre-trial proceedings, which makes it necessary to exceptionally apply the arrest warrant, as a personal guarantee in order to allow the proper development of the case.”151 143. By virtue of the foregoing, it arises that the First Special Criminal Court for Terrorism (Primer Juzgado Penal Especializado en Delito de Terrorismo), after more than fourteen years of the issuance of said precautionary measure, did not submit sufficient arguments to maintain Urcesino Ramírez-Rojas’ detention. 144. In view of the foregoing, the State has violated Article 7(3) of the Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) thereof, to the detriment of Urcesino Ramírez-Rojas in the second proceeding instituted against him. X ARTICLE 8 OF THE AMERICAN CONVENTION (RIGHT TO FAIR TRIAL) IN RELATION WITH ARTICLE 1(1) THEREOF Arguments of the Commission 145. With respect to the alleged violation of Article 8 of the Convention, the InterAmerican Commission stated that: a) The prosecutors and the judges who participated in the prosecution of Wilson García-Asto and Urcesino Ramírez-Rojas bore a secret or “faceless” identity, according to Article 15, subparagraph (1) of Decree-Law No. 25.475; b) The independence of these judges was affected as said positions were vested in temporary officers, and it was further affected by the lack of impartiality which was more evident as the defendants could not know the identity of the judges so as to challenge the objectivity of their actions; c) In the case of Urcesino Ramírez-Rojas, such situation became even more serious as he was tried and sentenced by a court established ex post facto to the facts with which he was charged. The legislation which gave rise to this jurisdiction dates of August 5, 1992 and the facts for which he was related to the investigation proceedings took place on July 27, 1991, when the jurisdiction laid in the ordinary judges; d) More than thirty-eight months passed from the detention of Urcesino Ramírez-Rojas until he was convicted by the first instance judgment, more than 48 months from the arrest until the confirmation of the second instance judgment and more than eight years in the aggregate from his detention until the judgment was confirmed through the dismissal of the motion for review; 151 Cf. Order No. 216 issued by the National Chamber for Terrorism (Sala Nacional de Terrorismo) on November 19, 2004 (case file of affidavits and comments thereon, pages 6015 to 6017).