74 2. No one shall be deprived of his property except upon payment of just compensation, for reasons of public utility or social interest, and in the cases and according to the forms established by law. 3. Usury and any other form of exploitation of man by man shall be prohibited by law. 124. In its analysis of the content and scope of Article 21 of the Convention in the instant case, the Court will take into account, in light of the general rules of interpretation set forth in Article 29 of that same Convention, as it has done previously,191 the special meaning of communal property of ancestral lands for the indigenous peoples, including the preservation of their cultural identity and its transmission to future generations, as well as the steps that the State has taken to make this right fully effective (supra para. 51). 125. Previously this Court192 as well as the European Court of Human Rights193 have asserted that human rights are live instruments, whose interpretation must go hand in hand with evolution of the times and of current living conditions. Said evolutionary interpretation is consistent with the general rules of interpretation embodied in Article 29 of the American Convention, as well as those set forth in the Vienna Convention on Treaty Law. 126. In this regard, this Court has stated that interpretation of a treaty should take into account not only the agreements and documents directly related to it (paragraph two of Article 31 of the Vienna Convention), but also the system of which it is a part (paragraph three of Article 31 of said Convention).194 127. In the instant case, in its analysis of the scope of Article 21 of the Convention, mentioned above, the Court deems it useful and appropriate to resort to other international treaties, aside from the American Convention, such as ILO Convention No. 169, to interpret its provisions in accordance with the evolution of the interAmerican system, taking into account relatedc developments in International Human Rights Law. 128. In this regard, the Court has pointed out that: The corpus juris of international human rights law comprises a set of international instruments of varied content and juridical effects (treaties, conventions, resolutions and declarations). Its dynamic evolution has had a positive impact on international law in affirming and building up the latter’s faculty for regulating relations between States and 191 See Case of the Mayagna (Sumo) Awas Tingni Community, supra note 176, para. 148. 192 See Case of the Gómez Paquiyauri brothers. Judgment of July 8, 2004. Series C No 110, para. 165; Case of the Mayagna (Sumo) Awas Tingni Community, supra note 176, para. 146; Case of the “Street Children” (Villagrán Morales et al.), supra note 182, para. 193, and The Right to Information on Consular Assistance in the Framework of the Guarantees of the Due Process of Law. Advisory Opinion OC16/97 of November 14, 1997. Series A No. 16, para. 114. 193 See Eur. Court H.R., Tyrer v. The United Kingdom, 5856/72, judgment of April 25, 1978. Series A no. A26, para. 31. 194 See Case of Tibi, supra note 179, para. 144; Case of the Gómez Paquiyauri brothers, supra note 192, para. 164; Case of the “Street Children” (Villagrán Morales et al.), supra note 182, paras. 192 and 193; and The Right to Information on Consular Assistance in the Framework of the Guarantees of the Due Process of Law, supra note 191, para. 113.