43 [...] the Court must recall that Peru signed and ratified the American Convention on Human Rights. Consequently, it accepted the treaty obligations set forth in the Convention with respect to all persons subject to its jurisdiction without any discrimination. It is not necessary to state that Peru, like the other States Parties to the Convention, accepted the obligations precisely in the exercise of its sovereignty. On becoming a State Party to the Convention, Peru accepted the competence of the organs of the Inter-American system for the protection of human rights, and therefore obligated itself, also in the exercise of its sovereignty, to participate in proceedings before the Commission and the Court and to assume the obligations that derive from them and from the general application of the Convention. 170. In conclusion, the Court declared that the negative of the Peruvian military authorities to obey and execute the legitimate order of the Public Law Chamber is a violation of Articles 1.1 and 2 of the Convention. XIV ON ARTICLE 11 171. The Commission stated that the State violated the victim’s right to honor by presenting him as a criminal and accepting his guilt as a fact, even when he was not convicted under a due and proper proceeding. Furthermore, the Commission declared that, in the case of Gustavo Cesti Hurtado, good reputation and honor are particularly essential as he works in the insurance and business sector. Moreover, the Commission requested that the Court should decree a series of measures to compensate him, in regard to the alleged violation (infra 190.c). 172. The State rejected the allegations of the Commission. In this regard, it declared that “it never offends persons” and that it brought the criminal proceeding against Gustavo Cesti Hurtado in exercise of its responsibilities. It observed that this proceeding has been of a confidential nature and, lastly, it stated that, in Peru, a person’s privacy and honor are legally protected and that any person who considers that he or she has been offended should invoke this protection. 173. On this point, Peru also declared that, by presenting the application, the Commission was implicitly converting it into a “Nation without law”, and made some observations about the country’s credibility in international financial circles. According to the State, “[i]t is paradoxical that the international community trusts the Peruvian system of laws, which protect human rights, while the [Commission] accuses it of facts that, in any case, have an ideological bias”. 174. In its final arguments, the Commission repeated that the proceeding under which Gustavo Cesti Hurtado was judged was not an ordinary proceeding. 175. In its final arguments, the State alleged that there were admissible presumptions of the responsibility of Gustavo Cesti Hurtado; however, his right to be presumed innocent had always been ensured. 176. Article 11 of the Convention establishes that 1. Everyone has the right to have his honor respected and his dignity recognized. 2. No one may be the object of arbitrary or abusive interference with his private life, his family, his home, or his correspondence, or of unlawful attacks on his honor or reputation.