51 pressure on judicial authorities that are not merely restricted to those actions defined as crimes or misdemeanors. 117. On this point, the Commission reiterates the fundamental principle that the “effective observance of human rights requires a juridical and institutional order in which the law takes precedence over the will of those who govern, and in which 169 there is a proper balance between all branches of government.” 118. Judicial independence is an essential guarantee for upholding the rights of the victims and the accused in any criminal trial. The United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers has emphasized that “[i]t is the principle of the separation of powers, together with the rule of law, that opens the way to an administration of justice that provides guarantees of independence, impartiality 170 and transparency.” 119. The IACHR has said that “from the institutional perspective, judges who are part of the State’s jurisdictional function must perform their functions without being subject to undue interference from the executive and legislative branches, the parties in the proceeding, social agents, and others organs connected to the 171 administration of justice.” In addition, judicial independence must be understood in a positive sense, as the duty of the State to ensure, de jure and de facto, that justice operators can perform their functions in an independent manner. Specifically, in the case of judges and magistrates, the bodies of the Inter-American system have identified the following guarantees: (a) establishment of an appropriate process for their appointment and removal, (b) tenure in their positions for the duration of the established mandate, and (c) freedom from external pressure. Guaranteeing judges freedom from external pressures is understood broadly to mean that “they are able to rule on the matters they hear on the basis of the facts and in accordance with the law, without any restriction and without being subject to influences, inducements, pressures, threats, or improper interferences, be they direct or indirect, from whatever sector, or 172 for whatever reason.” 120. In this regard, in addition to the guarantees identified in items (a) and (b), which were dealt with by the IACHR in its Second Report on the Situation of Human 169 IACHR, Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Venezuela, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.118 Doc. 4 rev. 1, adopted October 24, 2003, para. 528; IACHR, Resolution No. 01/90, Cases 9768, 9780, and 9828, Mexico, May 17, 1990, para. 42. 170 UN, Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, Report on the Promotion and Protection of All Human Rights, Civil, Political, Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Including the Right to Development, A/HRC/11/41, published March 24, 2009, para. 18. 171 IACHR, Second Report on the Situation of Human Rights Defenders in the Americas, para. 357; and IACHR, Application to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in the Case of Ana María Ruggeri Cova, Perkins Rocha Contreras, and Juan Carlos Apitz (First Court of Administrative Disputes) v. Venezuela, Case 12.489, November 29, 2006, para. 83. 172 and 383. IACHR, Second Report on the Situation of Human Rights Defenders in the Americas, paras. 359