13 his concurring opinion in the Case of Dismissed Congressional Employees (Aguado Alfaro et al.) v. Peru, stated:49 3. In other words, the organs of the Judiciary of each State Party to the American Convention should have an in-depth knowledge of and duly apply not only constitutional law but also international human rights law; should exercise ex officio the control of compliance with the constitution (constitutionality) and with international treaties (conventionality), considered together, since the international and national legal systems are in constant interaction in the domain of the protection of the individual. (underlining added). 33. The doctrine of "diffused control of conformity with the Convention" established by the I/A Court of H.R. is addressed to all national judges, who must exercise such "control" regardless of rank, grade, level or jurisdiction given to them by domestic regulations. b. Intensity of the “diffused control of conformity with the Convention”: of a greater degree when there is jurisdiction to not apply or declare the invalidity of a general norm 34. All judges and judicial bodies that perform functions from a material perspective "should" implement the "control of conformity with the Convention." This is the clear message that the I/A Court of H.R. imparted in the Judgement in the Case García Cabrera and Montiel Flores, on the subject of this concurring opinion. This does not exclude the judges that can not carry out a "control of constitutionality." 35. Indeed, the specificity of the doctrine on which judges must "ex oficio" carry out the control of conformity with the Convention "clearly within their respective competence and corresponding procedural regulations,” 50 can not be interpreted as limited in the exercise of the "diffused control of conformity with the Convention” but rather as a way to "calibrate” its intensity. This is because this type of control does not necessarily imply the application of the norms or jurisprudence of the Convention as opposed to the domestic ones, but rather it also implies, first, an attempt to harmonize domestic legislation with that of the Convention, through an “interpretation of the Convention” of the national standard. 36. Thus, in the so-called "diffused" systems of constitutional control where all judges have the power to not apply a law to the specific case because it contravenes the national Constitution, the degree of “control of conformity with the Convention” encompasses more when the domestic judges are able to disapply norms that are in accordance with the Convention. E This course is an intermediate degree of "control," which will operate only if there is a possible "interpretation" of national regulations in accordance with the Pact of San José (or some other international treaties, as discussed below) and the jurisprudence of the Convention. Through this "interpretation in accordance" the "conventional" internal standard is reflected. The degree of maximum intensity of the "control of conformity of the Convention" can be made by the highest Constitutional courts (usually the last interpreters in a particular constitutional legal system) that generally also have the power to declare the invalidity of the unconstitutional norm with erga omnes 49 Supra note 15, para. 3 of the concurring opinion of judge Antônio Augusto Cançade Trindade. 50 Specification carried out as of the Case of Dismissed Congressional Employees (Aguado Alfaro et al.) v. Perú, supra note 15, para. 128.