composition of the electoral body. The Court also notes that the Applicants did not clarify what kind of advantage candidates from the ruling party would benefit from which is allegedly denied to other candidates, particularly independent candidates. Accordingly, the Court does not find that the Applicants have proven any unfair advantage towards some candidates. Therefore, the Court does not find that the right to equal protection of the law has been violated in relation to independent candidates or any other candidates, as foreseen in Article 10(3) of the ACDEG, Article 3(2) of the Charter and Article 26 of the ICCPR. D. Alleged violation of the obligation to execute judgments 247. The Applicants assert that the Respondent State did not execute the judgment rendered by this Court on 18 November 2016 in the matter of APDH d'ivoire (merits), due to its failure to establish an independent and v Céte impartial electoral body which is in compliance with the international legal instruments to which the Respondent State is a party. The Applicants therefore submit that the Respondent State violated Article 30 of the Protocol. 248. They substantiate this claim based on their above mentioned submissions relating to the entities that nominate electoral body members, the method used to nominate those members which remain subject to the approval of the Council of Ministers and the fact that the electoral body only has the power to make proposals for the execution of its duties. 249. The Applicants also claim that the Respondent State failed to fulfil its obligation under Article 30 of the Protocol because it did not carry out the reform ordered by the Court within the timeline set by the Court, that is, one year from the date the judgment was rendered. 250. The Respondent honoured State disputes the claim of the Applicants and avers that it its international commitments by adopting Law N° 2019-708 of 5 August 2019 on the recomposition of the IEC. It argues that the impugned reform 54