4 12. We have heard of State policies systematically directed against certain ethnic minorities, to the point of damaging the crucial and beneficial communication between the surviving next of kin and their dead, in an attempt to destroy their culture. This has led me to propose, for the first time in legal doctrine (at least, as far as I know), in my extensive separate opinion 7 in the Moiwana Community v. Suriname (judgment of June 15, 2005), the concepts of after-life project, above and beyond the life project, and of spiritual damage, above and beyond moral damage, with their own juridical content. 13. What else is there to hear concerning an individual’s unlimited imagination to victimize his fellow men, or practice absolute evil in the name of State policies? Despite all this, most contemporary international case law continues insisting in implying that State crime does not exist. It closes its eyes to the acts of cruelty proved before an international human rights tribunal such as the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, and continues trying to persuade the unwary of the alleged impossibility of State crime. In its attachment to a dogma (societas delinquere non potest), it demonstrates its submission to the power of the State, its intellectual servility that can only generate the repudiation of the human conscience, and reveals the most complete insensitivity and indifference to human suffering. III. The insensitivity of the State to the consequences of its own criminal practices 14. In this regard, those of us who work in the domain of the international protection of human rights continue the fight, based less on our knowledge of the discipline at the service of safeguarding the oppressed, but rather on the feeling of ineluctable indignation, and an inclination towards mysticism. After all, there appear to be no limits to human cruelty, and it seems that the extremes of human evil constantly exceed imagination itself. This vision is exhausting for anyone who is truly concerned about the fate of his fellow men. 15. In one of his last books, the erudite scholar, Isaiah Berlin, when observing that the “primary duty of politics” was to avoid “the extremes of suffering,” noted the distressing fact that no era had witnessed "so much remorseless and continued slaughter of human beings by one another" as the twentieth century. 8 And, he added that, tragedy as distinct from disaster consisted in “conflicts of human actions, character or values,” and that the “tragic element” was always due to “inevitable human errors.” 9 16. Indeed, one of the unfortunate legacies of the twentieth century is to be found in the testimonies and reports of those who have suffered atrocities, some of them coldly calculated, planned and executed on a large scale by the State. These State crimes or atrocities reveal “the submission of the individual conscience to the 7 . Paragraphs 1-93. 8 . I. Berlin, The Crooked Timber of Humanity, Princeton, University Press, 1997, pp. 17 and 175. 9 . Ibid., p. 185.