A/HRC/11/41 page 11 hearings were held at which backgrounds of the nominees could be openly scrutinized. This experience was qualified by the United Nations as a major example of good practices.32 33. Where an organ of the executive or legislative branch is the one formally appointing judges33 following their selection by an independent body, recommendations from such a body should only be rejected in exceptional cases and on the basis of well established criteria that have been made public in advance. For such cases, there should be a specific procedure by which the executive body is required to substantiate in a written manner for which reasons it has not followed the recommendation of the above-mentioned independent body for the appointment of a proposed candidate. Furthermore, such written substantiation should be made accessible to the public. Such a procedure would help enhance transparency and accountability of selection and appointment. 34. When conducting country visits, the Special Rapporteur regularly examined the representation of women and of ethnic minorities in the judiciary.34 In some countries, he concluded that this representation is very low or non-existent.35 The Special Rapporteur underlined the importance to adopt and implement temporary special measures to achieve greater representation for both women and ethnic minorities until fair balance has been achieved.36 4. Guarantee of the “lawful” judge (prohibition of ex-post-facto tribunals) 35. The Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary state that everyone shall have the right to be tried by ordinary courts or tribunals using established legal procedures. Furthermore, they stipulate that tribunals that do not use the duly established procedures of the legal process shall not be created to displace the jurisdiction belonging to the ordinary courts or judicial tribunals.37 36. Throughout his mandate, the Special Rapporteur has focused considerable attention on the question of the military justice38 and the establishment of special courts, in particular for the trial 32 UN Chronicle, “Judicial independence as conflict prevention and resolution: The recent case of Ecuador’s High Court”, available at: http://www.un.org/Pubs/chronicle/2006/ issue1/0106p21.htm. 33 See Recommendation No. R (94) 12 (footnote 14), principle I (2) (c), para. 2. 34 E/CN.4/2005/60/Add.2, paras. 27-28; E/CN.4/2006/52/Add.3, paras. 60-62; E/CN.4/2006/52/Add.4, paras. 67-68; A/HRC/8/4/Add.2, para. 37. 35 A/HRC/4/25/Add.2, paras. 31 and 66. 36 A/HRC/4/25/Add.2, para. 80. 37 Principle 5. 38 A/61/384, paras. 19-46; E/CN.4/2005/60, paras. 38-41.