17 cannot rush perfection. Moreover, until the beginning of 2004, the Inter-American Court was one of the contemporary international Courts which mostly contributed to the evolution of the material content of the jus cogens, followed by the Criminal International Court ad hoc for former Yugoslavia. For any reason which escapes my understanding, lately it seems to have refrained its doctrinal and jurisprudential construction on the matter. 47. To my belief, in this Judgment in the case of Ximenes-Lopes, when determining the violations not only of Articles 4 and 5 of the Convention (acknowledged by the State itself), but also of Articles 8(1) and 25 of the Convention, it should have gone beyond regarding the latter, broadening the jus cogens scope also to the right of access to justice lato sensu, including the guarantees of due legal process therein. In that sense, I have ruled within this Court in the two last years, for example, inter alia, in the arguments of my Separate Opinions in the cases of López Álvarez v. Honduras (Judgment of February 01, 2006, paras. 53-55 of the Opinion), Massacre de Pueblo Bello v. Colômbia (Judgment of January 31, 2006, paras. 63-65 of the Opinion), Baldeón García v. Perú (Judgment of April 6, 2006, para. 10 of the Opinion), and Comunidade Indígena Sawhoyamaxa v. Paraguai (Judgment of March 29, 2006, para. 36 of the Opinion). I hope this Court soon has the courage to take this new qualitative step in its jurisprudential construction, since it did not take it in this Judgment of this case of Ximenes-Lopes. From the very day on which it takes it - I hope very soon - it shall be contributing to make it more difficult to repeat stories like Electra’s and Irene’s without punishment. Antônio Augusto Cançado Trindade Judge Pablo Saavedra-Alessandri Secretary