CONCURRING OPINION OF JUDGE A.A. CANÇADO TRINDADE 1. In the memorable public hearing of 08 August 2000 before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, the Delegations of both the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and the Dominican Republic sought to identify the context of the present case of the Haitians and Dominicans of Haitian Origin in the Dominican Republic, and pointed out - amidst signs of an appreciated procedural cooperation its considerable complexity and its character of a true human tragedy. This being so, besides voting in favour of the adoption by the Court of the present Resolution on Provisional Measures of Protection, I feel obliged to leave on the records, in this Concurring Opinion, my thoughts on the matter, given the dimension and proportions which the problem dealt with herein has acquired, constituting one of the great challenges of the International Law of Human Rights at the beginning of the XXIst century. I. Uprootedness and Human Rights: The Global Dimension. 2. In the aforementioned public hearing, the Dominican Delegation pointed out that the present case reflects a problem which concerns also the international community and that the search for a solution to it should not be incumbent entirely upon the shoulders of the Dominican Republic. In my understanding the Dominican Delegation is right in pointing out this aspect of the problem: we cannot, in fact, make abstraction of its causes. The contemporary phenomenon of the uprootedness, which is manifested in different regions of the world, discloses a truly global dimension, which presents a great challenge to legal science, and, in particular, the International Law of Human Rights. 3. In fact, in a "globalized" world - the new euphemism en vogue, - the frontiers are opened to capitals, investments, goods and services, but not necessarily to the human beings. The wealth is increasingly concentrated in the hands of a few ones, at the same time that those marginalized and excluded regrettably increase, in a growing (and statistically proven) way. The lessons of the past seem to have been forgotten, the sufferings of previous generations appear to have been in vain. The current "globalizing" frenzy, shown as something inevitable and irreversible, constituting in reality the most recent expression of a perverse social neodarwinism, - appears entirely devoid of all historical sense. 4. This framework reveals the dimension that the human being (of the era of the computers and the Internet) has given to his fellow-man, on this eve of the XXIst century: the human being has been placed by himself in a scale of priority inferior to that attributed to the capitals and goods, - in spite of all the struggles of the past, and of all the sacrifices of the previous generations. To the primacy of the capital over work1 corresponds that of egoism over solidarity. As a consequence of this contemporary tragedy - caused essentially by man himself, - perfectly avoidable if human solidarity prevailed over egoism, there emerges the new phenomenon of the uprootedness, mainly of those who seek to escape from hunger, from illnesses and 1 . This latter being understood not as a simple occupation, or a means of production, or source of income, but rather as a way to give meaning to life, to serve the fellow-men, and to attempt to improve the human condition.