4 protection of the human being; in its sixteenth and pioneering Advisory Opinion, on The Right to Information on Consular Assistance in the Framework of the Guarantees of the Due Process of Law (1999), which has inspired the international case-law in statu nascendi on the matter, the Inter-American Court has clarified that, in its interpretation of the norms of the American Convention, it should extend protection in new situations (such as that concerning the observance of the right to information on consular assistance) on the basis of pre-existing rights. The same vision has been propounded by the Inter-American Court in its subsequent forward-looking eighteenth Advisory Opinion, on the Juridical Condition and Rights of Undocumented Migrants (2003). 11. There is a converging case-law of the two regional Human Rights Courts - and indeed of other human rights international supervisory organs - on this issue. Thus, the European Court of Human Rights has reiteratedly pronounced to that effect8; in the Loizidou versus Turkey case (1995), for example, the European Court expressly discarded undue restrictions which would not only "seriously weaken" its role in the discharge of its functions but "would also diminish the effectiveness of the Convention as a constitutional instrument of European public order (ordre public)"9. The InterAmerican Court of Human Rights, on its part, has likewise repeatedly stressed the object and purpose of human rights treaties and the objective character of the obligations ensuing therefrom10, as well as the special character of human rights treaties, as distinguished from multilateral treaties of the traditional type11. 12. Such convergence of views of the two regional Human Rights Courts on the fundamental issue of the proper interpretation of human rights treaties naturally ensues from the overriding identity of the object and purpose of those treaties. General international law itself bears witness of the principle (apparently subsumed under the general rule of interpretation of Article 31 of the two Vienna Conventions on the Law of Treaties) whereby the interpretation is to enable a treaty to have appropriate effects12, - a principle which has been resorted to against eventual calls for an unduly restrictive interpretation. There is a jurisprudence constante pointing towards the restrictive interpretation of provisions which limit or restrict the exercise of recognised human rights13. the Due Process of Law, of 01.10.1999, pars. 114-115, and Concurring Opinion of Judge A.A. Cançado Trindade, pars. 9-11; IACtHR, case of the "Street Children" (Villagrán Morales and Others versus Guatemala), Judgment (on the merits) of 19.11.1999, pars. 193-194; IACtHR, case Cantoral Benavides versus Peru, Judgment (on the merits) of 18.08.2000, pars. 99 and 102-103; IACtHR, case Bámaca Velásquez versus Guatemala, Judgment (on the merits) of 25.11.2000, Individual Opinion of Judge A.A. Cançado Trindade, pars. 34-38; IACtHR, case of the Community Mayagna (Sumo) Awas Tingni versus Nicaragua, Judgment (on the merits and reparations) of 31.08.2001, pars. 148-149; IACtHR, case Bámaca Velásquez versus Guatemala, Judgment (on reparations) of 22.02.2002, Individual Opinion of Judge A.A. Cançado Trindade, par. 3. 8 . For example, in its judgments in the Wemhoff (1968), Belgian Linguistics (1968), Golder (1975), Ireland versus United Kingdom (1978) and Soering (1989) cases, among others. 9 . ECtHR, Loizidou versus Turkey case (preliminary objections, Judgment of 23.03.1995, par. 75. 10 . IACtHR, Advisory Opinions n. 1, on "Other Treaties" Subject to the Advisory Jurisdiction of the Court (1982), and n. 3, on Restrictions to the Death Penalty (1983), among others. 11 . E.g., inter alia, IACtHR, Advisory Opinion n. 2, on Effect of Reservations on the Entry into Force of the American Convention (1982). 12 . Cf., e.g., IACtHR, Advisory Opinion n. 4, on the Proposed Amendments to the Naturalization Provisions of the Constitution of Costa Rica (1984). 13 . Thus, in its judgment in the Golder case (1975), the European Court of Human Rights clearly stated that