15 47. As after the shadows the light gradually appears, the chiaroscuro of the life of the individuals and the people, of human existence, we must not disregard that, in this Judgment, the Inter-American Court has set forth “that in June of this year the President of the Republic has apologized to the authorities of the University of La Cantuta" (para. 233). Also, the Court has taken the provisions necessary so that the suffering of the Professor and the nine students killed or disappeared remains not only in the memory of their next of kin and beloved human beings but also in the collective memory, as a way to honor the victims and resist the erosion of time. 48. As it did in its recent Judgment in the case of La Prisión de Castro Castro, also in this Judgment of the case La Cantuta, the Court has equally valued the existence of the monument and public site called "El Ojo que Llora" (the Crying Eye), "created at the request of civil society and with the cooperation of the State authorities, which constitutes an important public recognition to the victims of violence in Peru. However, the Court considers that the State must guarantee that, in the term of a year, the 10 people declared as executed victims or victims of forced disappearance in this Judgment are represented in the said monument, in case they are not already represented, and if their next of kin wish so. (...)" (para. 236). IV. The Inadmissibility of Violations against Jus Cogens. 49. As a conclusion of this Separate Opinion, my last Opinion as Incumbent Judge of this Court, I allow myself to return to the starting point. State crimes entail serious legal consequences. At the time I finish writing this Separate Opinion, there are twelve requests of extradition of former President A. Fujimori submitted by Peru to Chile28, among which, the one corresponding to the liability for the events in this case of La Cantuta is included. Recently, in another case decided by this Court, that of Goiburú et al. vs. Paraguay (Judgment of September 22, 2006), the horrors of the so called "Operación Condor" were revealed, in the context of which State crimes were committed in a beyond-the-border or interstate level.29 At present, the reaction of legal conscience is shown in the recognition that the general duty of investigation, to guarantee the respect for the human rights consecrated in the American Convention (Article 1(1)), also applies in an interstate level, in the exercise of the collective guarantee by the States Parties in the American Convention (as it is the case of Chile and Peru). 50. In my Separate Opinion in the recent case of the Pueblo Bello Massacre (Judgment of January 31, 2006) I developed (as in several of my former Opinions) my arguments regarding the broad scope of the general duty of guarantee (Article 1(1) of the Convention) and the erga omnes obligations of protection of the Convention (paras. 2-13). The Court, in its Judgment in this case of La Cantuta, when pointing out that the facts of the cas d'espèce have infringed imperative laws of International Law (jus cogens), has positively esteemed the efforts of the respondent Government to attend “its duty -derived from its obligation to investigate - to request and impel, through appropriate judicial and diplomatic measures, the extradition of one of the main defendants” (paras. 159-160). An approximation or convergence between International Human Rights Law and International Criminal Law can be developed therefrom. 28 As remembered by this Court’s Judgment, para. 80(91). 29 A matter that is analyzed in my Separate Opinion (paras. 1-68) in that case.