JOINT CONCURRING OPINION OF JUDGES A.A. CANÇADO TRINDADE AND A. ABREU-BURELLI 1. In voting in favour of the present Judgment on reparations delivered by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights in the Loayza Tamayo versus Peru case, we feel obliged to express our thoughts on the matter, given our belief in the need for greater jurisprudential development in the matter of reparations for violations of human rights. Contemporary doctrine seems to recognize this need, in beginning to provide its first contributions towards greater precision to the scope of reparations in the ambit of the International Law of Human Rights. 2. Thus, contemporary doctrine on the matter has established the relationship between the right to reparation, the right to truth and the right to justice (which starts with the access to justice). The realization of those rights is hindered by measures of domestic law, such as the so-called self-proclaimed amnesties pertaining to violations of human rights, which lead to a situation of impunity1. 3. Those measures are incompatible with the duty of States to investigate those violations, rendering it impossible the vindication of the rights to truth and to the realization of justice, as well as, consequently, of the right to obtain reparation. One cannot thereby deny the close link between the persistence of impunity and the hindering of the very duties of investigation and of reparation, as well as of the guarantee of non-repetition of the harmful facts. 4. The aforementioned measures are, moreover, incompatible with the general obligation of States to respect and to secure respect for the protected human rights, guaranteeing the free and full exercise of these latter (in the terms of Article 1(1) of the American Convention on Human Rights). States are under the duty to eliminate those measures (which constitute obstacles to the realization of human rights), in conformity with the other general obligation to harmonize their domestic law with the international norms of protection 2 (in the terms of Article 2 of the American Convention on Human Rights). 5. Contemporary doctrine, furthermore, has identified distinct forms of reparation (restitutio in integrum, satisfaction, indemnizations, rehabilitation of the victims, guarantees of non repetition of the harmful facts, among others) from the perspective of the victims, of their needs, aspirations and claims 3. In fact, the terms of Article 63(1) of the American Convention on Human Rights4 disclose to 1. L. Joinet (rapporteur), La Cuestión de la Impunidad de los Autores de Violaciones de los Derechos Humanos (Derechos Civiles y Políticos) - Informe Final, ONU/Comisión de Derechos Humanos, doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1997/20, of 26.06.1997, pp. 1-34; and, for the economic, social and cultural rights, cf. El Hadji Guissé (special rapporteur), La Cuestión de la Impunidad de los Autores de Violaciones de los Derechos Humanos (Derechos Económicos, Sociales y Culturales) - Informe Final, ONU/Comisión de Derechos Humanos, doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1997/8, of 23.06.1997, pp. 1-43. 2. It may be recalled that, half a decade ago, the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action (1993), the main document adopted by the II World Conference of Human Rights, urged the States to "abrogate legislation leading to impunity for those responsible for grave violations of human rights, (...) and prosecute such violations (...)" (part II, paragraph 60). 3. Theo van Boven (special rapporteur), Study Concerning the Right to Restitution, Compensation and Rehabilitation for Victims of Gross Violations of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms -Final Report, U.N./Commission on Human Rights, doc. E/CN.4/Sub.2/1993/8, of 02.07.1993, pp. 1-65. 4. Article 63(1) of the American Convention provides that: -"If the Court finds that there has been a violation of a right or freedom protected by this Convention, the Court shall rule that the injured party be ensured the enjoyment of his right or freedom that was violated. It shall also rule, if appropriate, that the consequences of the measure or situation that constituted the breach of such right or freedom be remedied and fair compensation be paid to the injured party".