190. The Applicants also refer to the Courts’ consideration in that judgment where it established that “[rlegarding the institutional independence of this body, Article 1(2) of the administrative impugned authority law provides endowed that: ‘... with legal the IEC is an personality independent and_ financial autonomy”."8 191. In referring to the Court's finding that “[t]he above provision shows that the legal framework governing the Ivorian electoral body leaves room for assumption that the latter is institutionally independent,”’? the Applicants argue, however, that this conclusion does not correspond with reality and the electoral body in fact lacks independence and impartiality in terms of its administrative and financial autonomy 192. For the Applicants, autonomy refers to the ability of a body to govern itself and make decisions for itself. 193. To support the claim that the electoral body lacks administrative autonomy the Applicants refer to responsibilities of the electoral body and points out that for many of its duties, it only has the competence to make proposals, which are then to be decided by the government. This limitation in power by only having a right to make proposals underscores, for the Applicants, the lack of sufficient administrative autonomy. 194. The Applicants also claim that there is a lack of sufficient financial autonomy. According to them, the financial regulation of the electoral body is left entirely at the whims of the government which decides when and how it makes the financial resources available to the electoral body. 195. In referring to Article 40 of the impugned law, the Applicants point out that the budget is drafted by the Bureau which transmits it to the Ministry in charge of the 18 Ibid, § 121. 19 Ibid, § 122. 42