8 Convention defines as “principles” matters concerning “respect for essential rights,” based upon the “attributes of the human personality.” 28 As a third observation, it should be emphasized that Article 46(2) of the Convention establishes in detail the cases in which the rule of prior exhaustion of domestic remedies does not apply, i.e., the exceptions to it, namely, the lack of due process of law to assert domestic remedies, the impossibility of exercising them and the delay in resolving them. These exceptions must therefore be applied and interpreted restrictively. Consequently, it is not appropriate to invoke or even accept an exception to the rule in question that is not provided for in said article, because if it were, this could deprive it of any meaning or effet utile and, moreover, would leave its application subject to discretion and perhaps to arbitrariness. All of which does not mean that other preliminary objections, such as, for example, the Court's lack of jurisdiction, cannot be raised. Finally, it is worth reiterating that this rule has been established in the Convention as an essential component of the entire inter-American system for the promotion and protection of human rights, by stressing that, as indicated in the second paragraph of its Preamble, the “international protection… […] reinforc[es] or complement[s] the protection provided by the domestic law of the American States.” 29 Strict adherence to the rule of prior exhaustion of domestic remedies is not, therefore, a mere formalism or legal technicality, but rather its observance consolidates and strengthens the interAmerican human rights system, since it guarantees the principles of legal certainty, procedural balance and complementarity that underpin it, leaving no margin - or, in any case, the least margin possible – so that, beyond the explainable discrepancies that the Court's rulings may cause, particularly on the part of those who consider them adverse, it may be perceived that they do not respond strictly and exclusively to considerations of justice. This has to do with the international legal structure, which is still fundamentally based on the principle of sovereignty, and which, in the case of the Inter-American System, is enshrined in Articles 1 30 and 3(b) 31 of the Charter of the Organization of American States. Thus, the treaty 28 Paras. 1 and 2 :“Reaffirming their intention to consolidate in this hemisphere, within the framework of democratic institutions, a system of personal liberty and social justice based on respect for the essential rights of man; Recognizing that the essential rights of man are not derived from one's being a national of a certain state, but are based upon attributes of the human personality, and that they therefore justify international protection in the form of a convention reinforcing or complementing the protection provided by the domestic law of the American states.” 29 Idem. Perhaps Article 25(1) of the Convention is the one that best expresses the subsidiary nature of the Inter-American System of Human Rights, indicating that: “Everyone has the right to simple and prompt recourse, or any other effective recourse, to a competent court or tribunal for protection against acts that violate his fundamental rights recognized by the constitution or laws of the state concerned or by this Convention, even though such violation may have been committed by persons acting in the course of their official duties.” “The American States establish by this Charter the international organization that they have developed to achieve an order of peace and justice, to promote their solidarity, to strengthen their collaboration, and to defend their sovereignty, their territorial integrity, and their independence. Within the United Nations, the Organization of American States is a regional agency. (…)”. 30 31 “The American States reaffirm the following principles: …b) international order consists essentially of respect for the personality, sovereignty, and independence of States and the faithful fulfillment of obligations derived from treaties and other sources of international law.”