ACH PR '>/:~~~~": C :r{l~~ African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights Human Rights our Collective Responsibility Furthermore, in Pueblo Massacre v. Colombia, the same Court pointed to several procedural flaws, including the fact that the military justice system was not within the formal judicial branch and that its judges were active military officials as reasons why the Colombian military justice system simply could not be independent or impartial in trying military officials for human rights abuses.P' 121. Whereas the European Court emphasised that judicial proceedings must not only be independent and impartial but must also appear to be independent and impartial in Incal v. Turkey.IOS In this case, the Court found that in the trial of a civilian in which one of three judges was a member of the Military Legal Service, the military Judge's active military status, the possibility of military discipline for this judge" and the short duration of this judge's term appeared to have rendered concerns about independence and impartiality of the trial objectively.lw 122. The Complainants also cited the International Commission of Jurists' concerns of partiality and lack of independence of military judges and prosecutors as active members of the military have made military courts particularly vulnerable to allegations of impunity and lack of independence and impartiality, stating that, the independence and impartiality of military courts are 'often particularly questionable, as . these courts exist as part of the executive hierarchy, thus failing to achieve separation of powers. Officials in military courts answer to their superiors and are subject to hierarchical subordination, raising concerns about the actual independence and impartiality of the judges in these courts.l'? ,. , 123. In regard, the Complainants faulted the Egyptian military justice system to be falling precisely within this framework, with subordination to the executive, and the Minister of Defense.t'f They stated in the cases involving civilians, military courts do not satisfy the requirement 01 impartiality, subject to various legal formulations with the Commission among others. To support this the Complainants cited the Commissions' IACtHR, Pueblo Bello Massacre v. Colombia, (ser. C) No. 140, Judgment dated Jan. 31, 2006 ECtHR, Incal v. Turkey, App. No. 22678/93, Judgment dated Jun 9,1998, paras. 65-73. 106 ibid 104 105 Int'l Comm'n of Jurists, Military Jurisdiction and International Law: Militanj Courts and Gross Human Ri hts Violations 9 (2004), available at ht: www.ecoi.net file u load 87 118476488 parthttp://www.ecoi.netifile upload/87 ] 184764886 trib-mil-eng-part-i.pdfi.pdf, p 10. 108 See paragraph 163 107 281 P age The African Commission