31. Furthermore, it found that the remedy of amparo that was filed against the removal decision was not decided within a reasonable time or by an impartial judge. 42 32. In the case Apitz Barbera et al. v. Venezuela, the ICourtHR examined the dismissal of the former provisional judges of the First Contentious Administrative Court, because they had committed an inexcusable judicial error of granting a precautionary amparo that suspended the effects of an administrative decision that had denied the registration of a sale. In that case, the Inter-American Court observed that States are obliged to ensure that provisional judges are independent and, consequently, must grant them certain stability and permanence in office, because the temporary nature of their posting is not equivalent to removal at any time. In addition, the temporary nature should not entail any changes in the system of guarantees of the performance of the judge and the safeguard of the defendants.43 Indeed, for the ICourtHR, an appropriate appointment procedure and an established term of office are ways of guaranteeing the independence of judges. 44 33. Moreover, the Court repeated that the authority in charge of the proceeding to dismiss a judge must act impartially in the procedure established to this end, and permit the exercise of the right of defense, 45 in addition to being an independent court. 46 It also recalled that all the organs that exercise functions of a substantially jurisdictional nature are obliged to adopt just decision based on full respect for the guarantees of due process established in Article 8 of the American Convention.47 34. Regarding judicial independence, the ICourtHR reiterated the importance that this has for the separation of powers, and the State’s obligation to guarantee its institutional aspect, in relation to the Judiciary as a system, as well as with regard to its individual aspect; that is, with regard to the person of the specific judge. 48 Furthermore, impartiality requires that the judge who intervenes in a particular dispute approaches the facts of the case, subjectively, without any prejudice and, also, offering sufficient objective guarantees that allow any doubts that the defendant or the community may have about the absence of impartiality to be overcome.49 35. The ICourtHR also argued that, under international law, the valid reasons to proceed to suspend or remove a judge may be, inter alia, improper conduct or ineptitude. And judges cannot be removed merely because a decision they made was annulled following an appeal or review by a higher judicial organ. 50 In addition, it considered that the State had failed to comply with its obligation to provide the grounds for the sanction of dismissal Case of the Constitutional Tribunal v. Peru, Merits, reparations and costs, Judgment of January 31, 2001. Series C, No. 71, paras. 93 and 96. 42 Case of Apitz Barbera et al. (“First Contentious Administrative Court”) v. Venezuela. Preliminary objection, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of August 5, 2008. Series C No. 182, para. 43. 43 44 Ibidem, para. 138. 45 Ibidem, para. 44. 46 Ibidem, para. 137. 47 Ibidem, para. 46. 48 Ibidem, para. 55. 49 Ibidem, para. 56. 50 Ibidem, para. 84. 9