of independence and of respect for judicial authority is synonymous with arbitrariness. 69. Not only is judicial independence broadly guaranteed both internationally68 and regionally,69 but it has also been proclaimed in the constitutions of the States that have recognized the contentious jurisdiction of the Inter-American Court, whether expressly or through the inclusion of specific safeguards intended to protect it.70 70. Similarly, the Court finds it fitting to stress that the guarantee of judicial independence for electoral organizations is an indispensable feature of a democratic 68 Cf. United Nations Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary, adopted by the Seventh United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders, held in Milan, August 26, to September 6, 1985, endorsed by the General Assembly in Resolution 40/32 of November 29, 1985 and Resolution 40/146 of December 13, 1985, Principles 1, 2, 12 and 18, and the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct, drafted by the Judicial Group on Strengthening Judicial Integrity, made up of chief justices and senior judges, at the invitation of the United Nations International Center for the Prevention of Crime, and in the framework of the Global Program Against Corruption, annexed to Resolution 2006/23 of July 27, 2006, of the United Nations Council on Economic and Social Rights, Principle 1 and Application 1.1. The Human Rights Committee has stated, “States should take specific measures guaranteeing the independence of the judiciary, protecting judges from any form of political influence in their decision-making.” Human Rights Committee, General Comment No. 32, Article 14. Right to equality before courts and tribunals and to fair trial, August 23, 2007, Doc. CCPR/C/GC/32, August 23, 2007, para. 19. 69 Cf. Council of Europe, Recommendation No. R (94) 12 of the Committee of Ministers to Member States on the Independence, Efficiency and Role of Judges, adopted on October 13, 1994, principles I.1., I.2,b. and d., and I.3, and European Charter on the statute for judges (DAJ/DOC (98) 23), 1998, para. 1.1. See also, Consultative Council of European Judges, Opinion No. 1 for the attention of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe on standards concerning the independence of the judiciary and the irremovability of judges (Recommendation No R (94) 12 on the independence, efficiency and role of judges and the relevance of its standards and any other international standards to current problems in these fields) 1998, para. 60; Opinion no. 3 to the attention of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe “incompatible behaviour and impartiality, 2002, para. 16, and Magna Carta of Judges (Fundamental Principles), adopted at the 11th plenary meeting, Strasbourg, November 17, 2010, principle 10. The Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Fair Trial and Legal Assistance in Africa stipulate that “[t]he independence of judicial bodies and judicial officers shall be [...] respected by the government, its agencies and authorities.” See also, African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights, Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Fair Trial and Legal Assistance in Africa, adopted as part of the Commission’s annual activity report at the second ordinary session of the Assembly of Heads of State and Government of the African Union, held in Maputo from July 4 to 12, 2003, principles A.4.a. and l. See also, Minimum Standards of Judicial Independence, adopted by the International Bar Association in 1982; Conference of Chief Justices of Asia and the Pacific, Beijing Statement of Principles of the Independence of the Judiciary in the LAWASIA region, approved in 1995 by the Sixth Conference, principle 3; Latimer House Guidelines on Parliamentary Supremacy and Judicial Independence, adopted on June 19, 1998 by representatives of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association, Commonwealth Magistrates and Judges Association and the Commonwealth Legal Education Association, guidelines II, VI and VII; Iberoamerican Summit of Presidents of Supreme Courts and Tribunals of Justice, Statute of the Iberoamerican Judge, approved by the Sixth Summit, May 23, 24 and 25, 2001, Santa Cruz de Tenerife, Canary Islands, Spain, Articles 1, 2 and 14; Burgh House Principles on the Independence of the International Judiciary, adopted by the Study Group of the International Law Association on the Practice and Procedure of International Courts and Tribunals, in association with the Project on International Courts and Tribunals, in 2004, and the Declaración de Principios Mínimos sobre la Independencia de los Poderes Judiciales y de los Jueces en América Latina, Campeche Declaration, adopted by the Latin American Judicial Federation (Federación Latinoamericana de Magistrados), in 2008. 70 Cf. Constitution of Argentina, Articles 109 and114, numeral 6; Constitution of the Plurinational State of Bolivia, Article 178; Constitution of the Federative Republic of Brazil, Articles 95 and 103-B, paragraph 4, numeral I; Constitution of the Republic of Chile, Article 73; Constitution of Colombia, Articles 228 and 230; Constitution of the Republic of Costa Rica, Article 154; Constitution of the Republic of Ecuador, Articles 168, numeral 1, and 431; Constitution of El Salvador, Article 172; Constitution of the Republic of Guatemala, Article 203; Constitution of the Republic of Haiti, Article 177; Constitution of the Republic of Honduras, Articles 303 and 307; Constitution of the United Mexican States, Article 94; Constitution of the Republic of Nicaragua, Article 166; Constitution of the Republic of Panama, Article 207; Constitution of Peru, Articles 139, numeral 2, and 146; Constitution of the Dominican Republic, Article 151; Constitution of the Republic of Suriname, Article 10, and Constitution of the Eastern Republic of Uruguay, Article 118. 23