24 72. When it has determined the international responsibility of the State for violation of the American Convention, the Court proceeds to order measures designed to remedy this violation. Its jurisdiction includes the authority to administer justice; it is not restricted to stating the law, but also encompasses monitoring compliance with what has been decided. It is therefore necessary to establish and implement mechanisms or procedures for monitoring compliance with the judicial decisions, an activity that is inherent in the jurisdictional function.45 Monitoring compliance with judgments is one of the elements that comprises jurisdiction. To maintain otherwise, would mean affirming that the judgments delivered by the Court are merely declaratory and not effective. Compliance with the reparations ordered by the Court in its decisions is the materialization of justice for the specific case and, ultimately, of jurisdiction; to the contrary, the raison d’être for the functioning of the Court would be imperiled. 73. The effectiveness of judgments depends on their execution. The process should lead to the materialization of the protection of the right recognized in the judicial ruling, by the proper application of this ruling. 74. Compliance with judgment is strongly related to the right to access to justice, which is embodied in Articles 8 (Right to a Fair Trial) and 25 (Judicial Protection) of the American Convention.46 75. Article 8(1) of the Convention establishes that: 1. Every person has the right to a hearing, with due guarantees and within a reasonable time, by a competent, independent, and impartial tribunal, previously established by law, in the substantiation of any accusation of a criminal nature made against him or for the determination of his rights and obligations of a civil, labor, fiscal, or any other nature. 45 Cf. Barrios Altos case. Compliance with judgment. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of November 28, 2003, first considering paragraph; “The Last Temptation of Christ” case (Olmedo Bustos et al.). Compliance with judgment. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of November 28, 2003, first considering paragraph; Suárez Rosero case. Compliance with judgment. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of November 27, 2003, first considering paragraph; Caballero Delgado and Santana case. Compliance with judgment. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of November 27, 2003, first considering paragraph; Garrido and Baigorria case. Compliance with judgment. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of November 27, 2003, first considering paragraph; Blake case. Compliance with judgment. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of November 27, 2003, first considering paragraph; Benavides Cevallos case. Compliance with judgment. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of November 27, 2003, first considering paragraph; The “Street Children” case (Villagrán Morales et al.). Compliance with judgment. Order of the InterAmerican Court of Human Rights of November 27, 2003, first considering paragraph; Loayza Tamayo case. Compliance with judgment. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of November 27, 2003, first considering paragraph; Cantoral Benavides case. Compliance with judgment. Order of the InterAmerican Court of Human Rights of November 27, 2003, first considering paragraph; Bámaca Velásquez case. Compliance with judgment. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of November 27, 2003, first considering paragraph; The “White Van” case (Paniagua Morales et al.). Compliance with judgment. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of November 27, 2003, first considering paragraph; Castillo Páez case. Compliance with judgment. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of November 27, 2003, first considering paragraph; The Constitutional Court case. Compliance with judgment. Order of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of November 27, 2003, first considering paragraph; and Hilaire, Constantine and Benjamin et al.. Compliance with judgment. Order of the InterAmerican Court of Human Rights of November 27, 2003, first considering paragraph. 46 Cf. Cantos case, supra note 31, paras. 50, 52 and 77 (declaratory paragraph); El Caracazo case. Reparations, supra note 30, para. 107; and Las Palmeras case. Judgment of December 6, 2001. Series C No. 90, para. 54.