It has two main aspects: the institutional and the individual. Whereas institutional independence pertains to the status and relationship of the judiciary with the executive and legislative branches of Government, individual independence pertains to the personal independence of judges and their ability to perform their functions without fear of reprisal.11 77. The Court notes that the Applicants base their allegation on two grounds: first, on the proceedings before domestic courts and the fact that the Supreme Court, without their knowledge, and without any legal basis or stating its reasoning, quashed the judgment of the Bamako Court of Appeal. 78. As regards the first plea, the Court emphasises that it is vague and unclear. In effect, the Applicants do not put forward any specific arguments that would warrant an examination of the alleged violation. 79. On the second plea, the Court notes that nothing in the second judgment of the Supreme Court indicates that it was delivered without their knowledge, as the Applicants assert. More decisively, it emerges from the said judgment that the judges of the Supreme Court examined the two arguments put forward by the appellants as well as the response brief submitted by the Applicants. On each ground, the Supreme Court proffered reasons for its ruling before quashing the judgment of the Court of Appeal of Bamako. 80. On the whole, the Court considers that the nothing in the record supports the Applicants’ arguments. The Applicants do not question the institutional independence of the Respondent State’s Supreme Court or the individual independence of its judges. 11 Ibid. Ajavon v. Benin, § 278 19