22 whoever has been arbitrarily deprived of it.83 This is so, because to the contrary the States could remove the judges and therefore intervene in the Judicial Power without greater costs or control. Additionally, this could generate a fear in the other judges, who observe that their colleagues are dismissed and then not reinstated even when the dismissal has been arbitrary. Said fear could also affect judicial independence, since it would promote that the judges follow instructions or abstain from contesting both the nominating and punishing entity. Therefore, a remedy that declares the nullity of a dismissal of a judge because it was not lawful must necessarily lead to the reinstatement. In the present case, the appeal for annulment was suitable because it declared the nullity and, as stated by the SPA itself, it could have led to the reinstatement of Mrs. Reverón Trujillo. The question that arises from this is if the reasons set forth by the SPA for not reinstating her (the process of judicial restructuring and her condition of provisional judge) freed the SPA for reordering that reparation. 2.2 The judicial restructuring process in Venezuela i) The National Constituent Assembly 82. According to the State, “[b]efore the year 1999, the Venezuelan Judicial Power was submerged in a deep crisis, which put in doubt its independence, autonomy, and impartiality.” For this and other reasons, a popular referendum was convened, and on April 25, 1999 it approved the summons of a National Constituent Assembly (hereinafter “the Constituent Assembly”) “with a triple purpose: (i) transform the State, (ii) create a new body of law, and (iii) achieve the effective operation of a social and participative democracy.” ii) Decree of Reorganization of the Judicial Power 83. On August 12, 1999 the Constituent Assembly declared the “reorganization of all the bodies of the public power” due to the “serious political, economic, social, moral, and institutional crisis the country was going through.84 84. On August 19, 1999 the Constituent Assembly, through the Decree of Reorganization of the Judicial Power and the Prison System (hereinafter “the Decree of Reorganization”), created a Judicial Emergency Commission (hereinafter “the Emergency Commission”). 85 Among the competences of this Commission was the elaboration of a National Plan for the Evaluation and Selection of Judges, organization of the selection processes of judges through public competitive tenders for all the courts and judicial circuits, and the selection of the corresponding juries.86 That decree left “without effect the stability established by Law to the current judges 83 Cf. Case of Apitz Barbera et al. (First Court of Administrative Disputes) v. Venezuela, supra note 58, para. 246. 84 Cf. decree that declares the reorganization of all the bodies of the Public Power issued by the Constituent Assembly on August 12, 1999, published in the Official Gazette No. 36,764 of August 13, 1999 (dossier of annexes to the application, Volume I, annex A.1, folio 39). 85 Cf. Article 2 of the Decree on the Reorganization of the Judiciary and the Penitentiary System issued by the Constituent Assembly on August 19, 1999, published in the Official Gazette No. 36,805 of October 11, 1999 (dossier of annexes to the application, Volume I, annex A.2, folios 42 and 43). 86 Cf. Article 3(5)(a) of the Decree on the Reorganization of the Judiciary, supra note 85, folio 43.