90. In relation to the legal grounds applicable to impeachment that were in force at the time of the facts, article 130(9) of the Ecuadorian Constitution indicated that the members of the Constitutional Tribunal: […] could be impeached for statutory or constitutional offenses, committed in the performance of their functions. Congress may censure them in the case of a declaration of guilt, by a majority of its members. The censure shall result in the immediate removal of the official (underlining added). 91. While article 199 of the Constitution stipulated that: The organs of the judiciary shall be independent in the exercise of their obligations and attributes. No function of the State may interfere in matters within their competence. The justices and judges shall be independent in the exercise of their jurisdictional powers and even vis-àvis the other organs of the Judiciary; they shall only be subject to the Constitution and the law. 92. Meanwhile, article 9 of the 1997 Law on Constitutional Control established that the members the Constitutional Tribunal: (…) shall not be held responsible for the votes they emit or for the opinions they express in the exercise of the attributes of their office. 93. In these conditions, the applicable domestic law at the time of the facts recognized the mechanism of impeachment for the members of the Constitutional Chamber in relation to their office, but its purpose could not be for the National Congress to review the control of legality or constitutionality made in the judgments delivered by the Constitutional Tribunal, based on the principle of the separation of powers and the Constitutional Tribunal’s exclusive competence in this area. In addition, the Constitution established the term of office of the judges as an uninterrupted period of four years (articles 275 and 276 of the Ecuadorian Constitution in force at that time). 123 94. Despite this, the six motions of censure that were presented against the judges were directly related to judgments that the Constitutional Tribunal had handed down; in 123 Cf. Constitution of the Republic of Ecuador of August 11, 1998. “Art. 275. The Constitutional Tribunal with national jurisdiction, shall have its seat in Quito. It shall be composed of nine members, who shall have their respective substitutes. They shall perform their functions for four years and may be re-elected. The organic law shall determine the rules for their organization and functioning, and the procedures for their actions.” “Art. 276.- The Constitutional Tribunal shall have competence: 1. To hear and decide appeals filed on the unconstitutionality, in substance or in form, of organic and ordinary laws, decree-laws, ordinances, statutes, regulations, and resolutions issued by organs of the institutions of the State, and to suspend all or some of their effects. 2. To hear and decide on the unconstitutionality of the administrative acts of all public authorities. The declaration of unconstitutionality shall result in the annulment of the act, without prejudice to the administrative organ adopting the necessary measures to preserve respect for the constitutional norms. 3. To examine decisions that deny habeas corpus, habeas corpus data, and amparo, and cases of appeal established in the action for amparo. 4. To rule on objections of unconstitutionality by the President of the Republic, in the law drafting process. 5. To rule on conformity with the Constitution, and international treaties and conventions prior to their approval by the National Congress. 6. To decide disputes concerning competence or attributes assigned by the Constitution. 7. To exercise the other attributes conferred on it by the Constitution and the laws. The decisions of the Judiciary shall not be susceptible to control by the Constitutional Tribunal 25