stated that the authority in charge of the procedure of removing a judge must act independently and impartially in the procedure established for that purpose and permit the exercise of the right of defense.129 This is so, because the free removal of judges raises the objective doubt of the observer regarding the real possibility of judges deciding specific disputes without fear of reprisals.130 100. Regarding the guarantee against external pressure, the Basic Principles establish that judges will decide matters before them “on the basis of facts and in accordance with the law, without any restrictions, improper influences, inducements, pressures, threats or interferences, direct or indirect, from any quarter or for any reason.”131 In addition, the Principles establish that, “[t]here shall not be any inappropriate or unwarranted interference with the judicial process.”132 101. The Court observes that the Venezuelan Constitution includes these principles when it establishes in Article 255 a uniform regime for the judicial career with guarantees of stability for judges.133 102. On this issue, the Court finds it necessary to emphasize that the parties equate the situation of provisional and temporary judges as regards the type of stability they enjoy in their posts. In this regard, the Supreme Court of Justice, itself, specifically in response to the remedies filed by Mrs. Chocrón Chocrón in this case, indicated that “the direct removal of a provisional or temporary official […] without any disciplinary reason, [is a] power exercised by the Judicial Commission […] by express delegation of the Plenum.”134 In addition, other rulings of the Supreme Court of Justice have equated provisional and temporary judges.135 Thus, in the specific context of the instant case, the Court will use the expression “provisional nature” to refer to both provisional and temporary judges. 103. In the Reverón Trujillo case, the Court found that provisional judges in Venezuela exercise exactly the same functions as permanent judges; specifically, they administer justice.136 Consequently, the Court indicated that the accused have renders them unfit to discharge their duties” and that “All disciplinary, suspension or removal proceedings shall be determined in accordance with established standards of judicial conduct.” Cf. Principles 18 and 19 of the United Nations Basic Principles, supra note 123. 129 Cf. Case of the Constitutional Court v. Peru, supra note 121, para. 74; Case of Apitz Barbera et al. (“First Court of Administrative Disputes”) v. Venezuela, supra note 121, para. 44, and Case of Reverón Trujillo v. Venezuela, supra note 12, para. 78. 130 Cf. Case of Apitz Barbera et al. (“First Court of Administrative Disputes”) v. Venezuela, supra note 121, para. 44, and Case of Reverón Trujillo v. Venezuela, supra note 12, para. 78. See also Principles 2, 3 and 4 of the United Nations Basic Principles, supra note 123. 131 Cf. Principle 2 of the United Nations Basic Principles, supra note 123. 132 Cf. Principle 4 of the United Nations Basic Principles, supra note 123. 133 According to the Constitution “[e]ntry into the judicial career and the promotion of judges shall be effected through competitive examinations that ensure the suitability and excellence of the participants; they shall be selected by panels from the judicial circuits in the manner and conditions established by law. […] Judges may only be removed or suspended from their posts by the procedures expressly established by law. Cf. Article 255 of the Constitution of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, supra note 48, folio 1643. 134 Judgment No. 01798 of the Political and Administrative Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice, supra note 116, folio 497. 135 Judgment No. 02221 of the Political and Administrative Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice, supra note 75, folio 5814; Judgment No. 01225 of the Political and Administrative Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice, supra note 77, folio 5824; Judgment No. 1413 of the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice, supra note 78, folio 5837, and Judgment No. 5116 of the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice, supra note 78, folio 5852. 136 Cf. Case of Reverón Trujillo v. Venezuela, supra note 12, para. 114. 33