414. The Court recalls that the Commission indicated that, with regard to access to justice, this case provides examples of specific actions that point to a situation of structural discrimination, because not only were no criminal proceedings opened when workplace irregularities were found during the Hacienda Brasil Verde inspections, but also, when the labor proceedings were opened, a conciliation agreement was reached with the hacienda’s owner without taking the victims into account. Moreover, the representatives indicated that the lack of effective actions by the authorities in response to the complaints, and also the recurrence of the facts denounced reveal a situation of structural discrimination by the State that permitted the perpetuation of a situation involving the exploitation of a specific group of individuals. 415. In this regard, the Court has established in its case law that Article 1(1) of the Convention is a norm of a general nature, and its content extends to all the provisions of the treaty, because it establishes the obligation of the States Parties to respect and to ensure the free and full enjoyment of the rights and freedoms recognized therein “without any discrimination.” In other words, whatsoever its origin or form any treatment that may be considered discriminatory in relation to the exercise of any of the rights recognized in the Convention is per se incompatible with this instrument. The State’s failure to comply with the general obligation to respect and to ensure human rights, by any discriminatory treatment, gives rise to its international responsibility. Thus, an indissoluble connection exists between the obligation to respect and to ensure human rights and the principle of equality and nondiscrimination.514 416. The Court has also indicated that the principle of the equal and effective protection of the law and non-discrimination is a prominent element of the human rights protection system that is established in numerous international instrument and has been developed by legal doctrine and jurisprudence. At the current stage of evolution of international law, the fundamental principle of equality and non-discrimination has entered the domain of jus cogens. It underlies the legal framework of national and international public order and permeates the whole legal system.515 417. In this case, the Court notes that there was a disproportionate impact on one segment of the population that shared characteristics relating to their condition of exclusion, poverty and lack of schooling. It was verified that the victims found in the 2000 inspection shared these characteristics and this placed them in a special situation of vulnerability (supra para. 41). 418. The Court notes that the analysis of the proceedings filed in relation to the facts that occurred in Hacienda Brasil Verde reveals that the authorities did not accord the facts that were denounced the extreme seriousness these facts signified and, as a result, they failed to act with the due diligence required to guarantee the victims’ rights. The lack of action, as well as the leniency of the agreements and recommendations that were made, reflected a failure to condemn the facts that occurred in Hacienda Brasil Verde. The Court considers that the failure to act and to punish these facts may be explained by a normalization of the conditions to which individuals with certain characteristics from Brazil’s poorest states were continually subjected 419. Thus, it is reasonable to conclude that the lack of due diligence and punishment for the act of subjecting someone to a condition similar to slavery was related to a preconception of the conditions to which it was normal that workers of the haciendas of the north and northeast of Brazil were subjected. This preconception was discriminatory in relation to the 514 Juridical Status and Rights of Undocumented Migrants, para. 85; and Case of Duque, para. 93. 515 Juridical Status and Rights of Undocumented Migrants, para. 101; and Case of Duque, para. 91. 102