"a sense of awe and wonder at human destiny, and human affairs in general, in which the historian is on common ground with the poet or the visual artist. So perhaps he is half-way between the scientist and the poet. (...) I am very conscious of the tragedy of human events (...). When I study history I try to penetrate beyond the human phenomena to what lies behind them. (...) My curiosity leads me on to be curious about the nature and meaning of destiny (if there is such a thing), about existence as a whole. (...) For me history is a way of entering into and trying to comprehend the universe. Every human being has a feeling that life is mysterious, and every human being is to some extent trying to comprehend the incomprehensible."30 52. Each human rights case submitted to the consideration of this Court is a universe in itself, which, in my opinion, reveals – some with greater density – the uncertainties and mysteries that surround human existence, the inquiries on the alleged destination, and the tragedy of the human condition. An international court is called upon to hear and issue a ruling on facts that frequently reveal violence and injustice that victimize so many human beings on a daily basis. In effect, human nature does not seem to have changed throughout the centuries. 53. It is hard for me to escape from the impression that, submitting the noble work of an international human rights tribunal such as this Court, to quantifications and statistical graphs, is an improper trivialization of the mission reserved to it. An additional brief precision would be appropriate here, also in relation to quantifications that seem to me lack all sense of being. The cases under supervision of the compliance of the Judgment of the Court are not cases “en process”, as they have been incorrectly characterized in order to try to feed “productivity” statistical graphs of this Tribunal (and impress the unwary). They are, instead, cases that have already been processed with regard to their merits and reparations and they are awaiting the comprehensive compliance of the corresponding Judgments, that is, cases totally or partially not complied with by the corresponding respondent States up to that date. VII. The Kantian Imperative and the Due Process of Law. 54. This leads me to another, correlated, line of reflection. The conceptualization of the human person was enhanced in the line of thinking of Emmanuel Kant, when he acknowledged that the first had an intrinsic dignity, which demands respect for oneself and in all relationships with other human beings. Each person, as a moral being (homo noumenon), subject of practical reason, is an end in themselves, thus they may never be treated as a means for the purposes of others. In his Groundworks for the Metaphysics of Moral (1785)31 E. Kant formulated his well-known imperative, according to which each person must act only according to a maxim they aspire while it becomes a universal law.32 . 30 Ibid., pp. 28, 38, and 40. . Works originally published in 1785, it had another three editions authorized by him (en 1786, 1792, and 1797), and it was finally offered to the public revised by him, with the summarized title The Metaphysics of Morals (1797), two years after the publication of his project for Everlasting Peace (1795). 31 . E. Kant, Fondements de la métaphysique des moeurs (1785), Paris, Libr. Delagrave, 1999, pp. 46, 103, 125-129, 136-137, 159, 164, and 166-167; I. Kant, The Metaphysics of Morals (1797), Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2006 32