10 meaning of the Convention."25 In the instant case, the Court has quite correctly established a violation of Article 25 of the Convention (paragraph 251). 29. In my judgment, due process requires recourse to a competent court or tribunal (stricto sensu), just as the realization of justice (access to a competent court lato sensu) requires due process. The right to avail oneself of the courts –the right of recourse to the law- only materializes through observance of due process of law and of the basic principles that comprise due process. It is faithful observance of these principles that leads to the realization of justice, i.e., to everyone’s right of recourse to the courts in its fullest sense. Hence the ineluctable and intimate interrelationship between articles 8 and 25 of the American Convention affords the maximum protection of the individual’s inherent human rights. Antônio Augusto Cançado Trindade Judge Pablo Saavedra-Alessandri Secretary 25 For the Court’s holdings to this effect over the last four years, v.g., inter alia, Ivcher Bronstein vs. Peru (Judgment of February 6, 2001, para. 135), Mayagna (Sumo) Awas Tingni Community vs. Nicaragua (Judgment of August 31, 2001, para. 112), Cantos vs. Argentina (Judgment of November 28, 2002, para. 52); Juan Humberto Sánchez vs. Honduras (Judgment of June 7, 2003, para. 121); Maritza Urrutia vs. Guatemala (Judgment of November 27, 2003, para. 117); 19 Tradesmen vs. Colombia (Judgment of July 5, 2004, para. 193).