682 AFRICAN COURT LAW REPORT VOLUME 1 (2006-2016) obligation also emanating from these provisions; that the State Parties, including Côte d’Ivoire, have the obligation to establish and strengthen independent and impartial national electoral bodies. 109. The Applicant contends that a majority of the members of the Ivorian electoral body represent personalities, groups and political parties; that since the latter have special interests to protect, their representatives cannot claim to be independent or impartial; that an agent is hardly independent of his superior from whom he receives the directives required to discharge his mandate; that this lack of independence is valid for all members of the IEC representing personalities or political parties. 110. The Applicant argues that, in choosing this mode of representation of personalities and political parties for the composition of its electoral body, the Respondent State violated its commitment to establish an independent and impartial body for management of elections. 111. The Respondent State refutes the Applicant’s allegations. It maintains that the composition of the electoral body integrates all the parties concerned for the proper conduct, transparency and credibility of the electoral exercise; that the current configuration of the IEC was arrived at consensually; that, besides, this practice is consistent with the letter and spirit of the ECOWAS Democracy Protocol, especially Article 3 thereof. 112. With respect to representation of personalities and political parties within the IEC, the Respondent State contends that, within the meaning of Article 5 of the impugned law, representation as a mandate does not bind members of the IEC to the personalities and political parties; that the said members of the electoral commission are not subject to any administrative hierarchy nor do they receive instructions from the Government; that it was in fact for this reason that the impugned law describes the IEC as “an independent administrative authority endowed with legal personality and financial autonomy”. 113. The Respondent State further maintains that the appointment of members of the Bureau of the IEC Central Commission through election is sufficient proof of the independence and impartiality of this body. 114. Article 17(1) of the African Charter on Democracy on which the Applicant relies, provides that: “State Parties affirm their commitment to regularly holding transparent, free and fair elections in accordance with the Union’s Declaration on the Principle Governing Democratic Elections in Africa. To this end, State Parties shall establish and strengthen independent and impartial national electoral bodies responsible for the management of elections”. 115. Article 3 of the ECOWAS Democracy Protocol also mentioned by the Applicant provides that: “The bodies responsible for organising the elections shall be independent and/or neutral and shall have the confidence of all the political actors. Where necessary, appropriate national consultations shall be organised to determine the nature and the structure of the bodies”.