16 51. When underlining the broad scope of Article 1(1) of the American Convention, the Court has immediately after affirmed the obligation of the States Parties to investigate human rights violations and to prosecute and punish the responsible participants (para. 160). The fulfillment of such an obligation gains importance before the seriousness of the facts of this case of La Cantuta, eloquently emphasized at the very beginning of an account in the case: "As opposed to what is expected, impunity does not conceal the crime, it increases it. The chain of crimes by the concealers is added to the crime committed by the perpetrators – material and intellectual. Kidnapping, cold-blooded murdering, concealed burial and body incineration are completed by lying, denial and delay in justice administration. Except for honorable cases, prosecutors and judges, non executive members, members of congress, military and civil governors have become part of the large file of the accessory impunity with which it is expected to return the case of the nine students and the professor of the Universidad de la Cantuta to the mass grave, cold-blooded murdered at the dawn of July 18, 1992.”30 52. It was a State crime which involved, with animus agressionis, a chain of command, composed by several agents of the public power (of the different State powers), from the President of the Republic to the perpetrators of the extra-legal executions and other human rights violations. When analyzing the legal consequences of the said violations, this Court has pointed out, in this Judgment of the case La Cantuta, that "Before the nature and seriousness of the facts, and within a context of systematic violation of human rights, the need to eradicate impunity appears before the international community as a duty of interstate cooperation for such effects. Access to justice constitutes an imperative rule of International Law and, as such, it generates erga omnes obligations for the States to adopt the necessary provisions so as not to leave those violations without punishment, whether exercising its jurisdiction to apply its domestic law and International Law to prosecute and, eventually, penalize those responsible for such facts, or cooperating with other States that do so or attempt to do so. The Court remembers that, under the mechanism of collective guarantee set forth in the American Convention, jointly with regional and universal international obligations on the matter, the States Parties of the Convention must cooperate with each other in that sense” (para. 160).31 53. Consequently, the broadening of the material content of the jus cogens is consolidated in this Judgment, as it encompasses the right of access to justice lato sensu, without which there is simply no Constitutional State. I honestly hope that the Court maintains this position in the future, and does not admit any attempt to stop its guaranteeing and emancipating jurisprudence of the human being regarding the matter, as this scope of protection of the human being does not imply nor admits steps back. I sincerely hope that the Court always keeps progressing in its jurisprudential construction regarding the imperative rules of International Law. 54. As a reaction of the universal legal conscience (which to me constitutes the ultimate material source of the whole Law), in our times a truly universal legal system of absolute prohibition of torture, of forced disappearances of people and of summary and extra-legal executions has been constituted. The said prohibition belongs to the scope of jus cogens. And said crimes against humanity (located in the 30 31 APRODEH, De la Tierra Brotó la Verdad..., op. cit. supra No. (7), p. 5. And also cf. paras. 239-241, regarding the intangibility of imperative rules of International Law (jus cogens) and the role of education in human rights.