add contemporary International Criminal Law in full evolution (with its impact on the
States’ domestic law). In my opinion, the Law is just one, and all these aspects must
be treated from the perspective of a necessarily integrating hermeneutics.
100. In the present sphere of protection of human beings, there is still a long way to
go, despite the important progress of the doctrine and practice of international law in
the previous years. The first steps have been taken, both nationally and
internationally, in the fight against impunity and in favor of the prevalence of the right
to trust and justice. In its request for interpretation, of March 15, 2007, of the
Judgment of merits and reparations in the present case of the Castro Castro Prison,
the Peruvian State invoked the right to truth (para. 52), while acknowledging the
work in favor of this right carried out in Peru by he Commission for Truth and
Reconciliation (para. 5(20)), duly taken into consideration by the Inter-American
Court (para. 5(23)).
101. The appellant State referred to the proven “multiplicity of criminal acts”
perpetrated by members of Sendero Luminoso73 that victimized the population and
“remain in the nation’s collective conscience," (para. 5(20)), while acknowledging that
they “are not a direct party to this case” of the Castro Castro Prison (para. 5(2)). It is
understandable that the appellant State would evoke, in the same brief, the protection
of all victims (para. 6(20)), of the tragic armed conflict that flagellated the country,
and specifically its population, as well as search for a clarification of the applicable law
and the recent doctrinal progress in this regard (para. 6(2)).
102. What is not true (precise) is to presume that the international juridical system
is not built for situations such as those of the mentioned Peruvian armed conflict
(para. 6(27)). The considerations previously developed by me reveal a series of
complexities that instead lead to precisions with regard to the applicable law (cf.
supra). But – I allow myself to insist on this matter – nothing is beyond the protection
of the Law. In what refers to the Inter-American Court, its jurisdiction, in the terms of
the American Convention, it is directed towards the determination of the State’s
responsibility, for which it must confine itself to the facts stated in the application. But
the regulations on protection of the American Convention do not exclude the
concomitant application of International Humanitarian Law and that of criminal law
(domestic and international); and the latter is directed toward the determination of
individual criminal responsibility.
103. In successive Concurring and Separate Opinions I have presented in different
Judgments of this Court, I have defended the complementary nature (and even the
concomitant application of certain circumstances) of the corresponding regulations of
International Human Rights Law (IHRL), of International Humanitarian Law (IHL), and
International Refugee Law (IRL). Regarding this matter, I allow myself to make
reference to my Concurring Opinion in the case of Las Palmeras versus Colombia
(preliminary objections, Judgment of 02.04.2000), my Concurring Opinion in the case
of Bámaca Velásquez versus Guatemala (merits, Judgment of 11.25.2000), my
Concurring Opinion in the case of the Pueblo Indígena Kankuamo versus Colombia
Cours de l'Académie de Droit International de la Haye (2005) cap. XXIII, pp. 150-171;
A.A. Cançado Trindade, A Humanização do Direito Internacional, Belo
Horizonte/Brasil, Edit. Del Rey, 2006, pp. 279-352.
.
On the history of Sendero Luminoso, cf., v.g., S. Roncagliolo, La Cuarta
Espada, Lima, Ed. Debate, 2007, pp. 15-245; and on the violence and origins of the
terrorism of Sendero Luminoso, cf., v.g., [Several Authors,] Shining Path of Peru (ed.
D. Scott Palmer), N.Y., St. Martin's Press, 1992, pp. 1-247.
73