26 Corporal punishment, such as the one examined in the cas d'espèce, is per se in breach of the Convention (Article 5(1) and (2)) and of peremptory norms of international law (paragraphs 70, 88 and 100). In several of my Individual Opinions presented in this Court, I have drawn attention to the relevance of the expanding material content and scope of jus cogens. The present Judgment is inserted into this reassuringly evolutive jurisprudential construction. 87. Thus, in its historical Advisory Opinion n. 18 on The Juridical Condition and the Rights of the Undocumented Migrants (of 17.09.2003), the Inter-American Court significantly held that the aforementioned fundamental principle of equality and nondiscrimination, in the present stage of evolution of International Law, "has entered into the domain of the jus cogens"; on such principle, which "permeates every legal order", - the Court correctly added, - "rests the whole juridical structure of the national and international public order"89. The Court, moreover, referred to the evolution of the concept of jus cogens, transcending the ambit of both the law of treaties and of the law of the international responsibility of the State, so as to reach general international law and the very foundations of the international legal order90. 88. In support of this view, in my Concurring Opinion in that pronouncement of the Court (Advisory Opinion n. 18), after summarizing the history of the entry of jus cogens into the conceptual universe of international law, I maintained that "The emergence and assertion of jus cogens in contemporary International Law fulfil the necessity of a minimum of verticalization in the international legal order, erected upon pillars in which the juridical and the ethical are merged. (...) On my part, I have always sustained that it is an ineluctable consequence of the affirmation and the very existence of peremptory norms of International Law their not being limited to the conventional norms, to the law of treaties, and their being extended to every and any juridical act91. Recent developments point out in the same sense, that is, that the domain of the jus cogens, beyond the law of treaties, encompasses likewise general international law92. Moreover, the jus cogens, in my understanding, is an open category, which expands itself to the extent that the universal juridical conscience (material source of all Law) awakens for the necessity to protect the rights inherent to each human being in every and any situation". To the international objective responsibility of the States corresponds necessarily the notion of objective illegality (one of the elements underlying the concept of jus cogens). In our days, no one would dare to deny the objective illegality of acts of genocide93, of 89 . Paragraph 101, and cf. resolutory points ns. 2 and 4 of Advisory Opinion n. 18. 90 . Paragraphs 98-99 of Advisory Opinion n. 18. 91 . Cf. A.A. Cançado Trindade, Tratado de Direito Internacional..., op. cit. supra n. (97), vol. II, pp. 415-416. 92 . For the extension of jus cogens to all possible juridical acts, cf., e.g., E. Suy, «The Concept of Jus Cogens in Public International Law», in Papers and Proceedings of the Conference on International Law (Langonissi, Greece, 03-08.04.1966), Geneva, C.E.I.P., 1967, pp. 17-77. 93 . In its Judgment of 11 July 1996, in the case concerning the Application of the Convention against Genocide,