as occurred in this case. It is also clear that the determination of responsibility in a court ruling refers to the State, and not to individuals, so it was not a trial of then President Rafael Correa, but rather the actions of the authorities that produced the violations to human rights, which in this case falls fundamentally on the Judiciary. 22. However, despite the fact that the judgment is clear on each of these aspects, I consider it relevant to point out the importance that international acknowledgments of the State be carried out in response to the legal conviction that the actions of the authorities constituted violations of the American Convention, avoiding the instrumentalization of said recognitions, either to obtain political benefits from a group, or to achieve goals pursued by a government. Failure to do so may affect the legitimacy of a judgment and therefore its effectiveness. It is also important to take into consideration the importance that people outside a process, but whose image may be affected by it especially when there is an acknowledgment of responsibility, have some possibility of participation. The current Rules of Procedure do not allow this participation, but finding ways to allow such participation can be an element that contributes to the legitimacy and justice of the process. Humberto Antonio Sierra Porto Judge Pablo Saavedra Alessandri Secretary 6