49 violations are inadmissible.73 The Court deems that the general obligations enshrined in Articles 1(1) and 2 of the American Convention require that the States Party adopt timely provisions of all types for no one to be denied the right to judicial protection,74 enshrined in Article 25 of the American Convention. 117. In accordance with the obligations undertaken by the States pursuant to the Convention, no domestic legal provision or institution, including extinguishment, can oppose compliance with the judgments of the Court regarding investigation and punishment of those responsible for human rights violations. If that were not the case, the rights enshrined in the American Convention would be devoid of effective protection. This understanding of the Court is in accordance with the language and the spirit of the Convention, as well as the general principles of law; one of these principles is that of pacta sunt servanda, which requires ensuring effective application of the provisions of a treaty in the domestic legal system of the States Party.75(infra 142) 118. Pursuant to the general principles of law and as follows from Article 27 of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, domestic legal rules or institutions can in no way hinder full application of decisions by international bodies for protection of human rights. 119. It is also appropriate to emphasize that the State has acknowledged its international responsibility in the instant case for violation of Articles 8 and 25 of the American Convention, which protect the rights to fair trial and to judicial protection, respectively, to the detriment of Walter David Bulacio and his next of kin (supra 3138). Furthermore, this Court has deemed proven (supra 69.C.6) that despite commencement of several judicial proceedings, to date -over twelve years after the facts- no one has been punished for his responsibility in them. Therefore, there exists a situation of grave impunity. 120. The Court deems that impunity is: the overall lack of investigation, pursuit, capture, trial and conviction of those responsible for violations of rights protected under the American Convention, as the State has the obligation to combat said situation by all legal means within its power, as impunity fosters chronic recidivism of human rights violations and total defenselessness of the victims and of their next of kin.76 121. In light of the above, it is necessary for the State to continue and conclude the investigation of the facts and to punish those responsible for them. The next of kin of the victim must have full access and the capacity to act at all stages and levels of said investigations, pursuant to domestic legislation and the provisions of the 73 Cf., Trujillo Oroza Case, Reparations, supra note 30, para. 106; Barrios Altos Case, supra note 3, para. 41; and Barrios Altos Case. Interpretation of the Judgment on the Merits. (Art. 67 American Convention on Human Rights). September 3, 2001 Judgment. Series C No. 83, para. 15. 74 Cf., Barrios Altos Case, supra note 3, para. 43. 75 Cf., “Five Pensioners” Case, supra note 4, para. 164; Hilaire, Constantine and Benjamin et al. Case, supra note 5, para. 112; and Trujillo Oroza Case, Reparations, supra note 30, para. 96. 76 Cf., Juan Humberto Sánchez Case, supra note 4, paras. 143 and 185; Las Palmeras Case, Reparations, supra note 5, para. 53.a); and El Caracazo Case, Reparations, supra note 5, paras. 116 and 117.