18 60. It is not surprising then that the problem of evil has been and continues to be a major concern throughout the history of human thought. Over the centuries, philosophers, theologians and scholars have examined the problem, without finding a conclusive or completely satisfactory answer. As R.P. Sertillanges stated in an authoritative work on the issue: “L'angoisse du mal s'impose à toutes les âmes, à tous les groupes et à toutes civilisations. […] Le problème du mal met en cause la destinée de chacun, l'avenir du genre humain.”63 61. In brief, terror cannot be fought by terror, but rather by law. As I stated also in my separate opinion in the Ituango Massacres v. Colombia (Judgment of July 1, 2006), lamentably and tragically, State crimes: “are continually repeated in different latitudes, amidst the manipulation or fabrication of so-called ‘public (or published) opinion. The ‘post-modern’ human being seems to have lost his memory and, consequently, State crimes continue to be repeated. Thus, the invasion and occupation of Iraq in 2003, perpetrated by the socalled “coalition” of States, contrary to the Charter of the United Nations and in one of the most flagrant violations of international law of recent decades, has been followed by the killing of innocent people, arbitrary detentions (even in secret prisons), the systematic practice of torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, and severe and systematic violations of human rights and international humanitarian law, notorious and public and reliably proved,64 in implementation – evidently wrongful – of a State policy (the so-called “war [sic]65 on terror”). Since its judgments in Cantoral Benavides v. Peru (of August 18, 2000, paras. 95-96) and Maritza Urrutia v. Guatemala (of November 27, 2003, para. 89), the Inter-American Court has consistently maintained the absolute prohibition of torture and ill-treatment, under any circumstances, including war, threat of war, counter-terrorism activities, internal conflicts, or internal states of emergency or instability” (para. 38). VIII. The expansion of the substantial content of jus cogens 62. Despite what I have described above with regard to “Operation Condor,” I would like to conclude this separate opinion on a positive note. In this case of Goiburú et al. v. Paraguay, the Court has reaffirmed its consistent case law in the sense that the crimes of torture and forced disappearance of persons are violations of jus cogens, entailing the obligation to investigate them and punish those responsible (paras. 84, 93 and 128), in order to end impunity. In the instant case, the States of the Southern Cone established a repressive plan to commit these violations systematically and conceal their acts, which are aggravating circumstances (aggravated international responsibility). 63 . R.P. Sertillanges, Le problème du mal - l'histoire, Paris, Aubier, 1948, p. 5. 64 . Cf., very recently, e.g.: United Nations/Committee against Torture, Consideration of Reports Submitted by States Parties under Article 19 of the Convention - United States of America: Conclusions and Recommendations of the Committee against Torture, document CAT/C/USA/CO/2, of 18 May 2006, pp. 1-11; Council of Europe/Parliamentary Assembly - Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights, Alleged Secret Detentions in Council of Europe Member States - Memorandum (rapporteur D. Marty), document AS/JUR/2006/03.rev, of January 22, 2006, pp. 1-25; Council of Europe/Parliamentary Assembly - Committee on Legal Affairs and Human Rights, Alleged Secret Detentions and Unlawful Inter-State Transfers Involving Council of Europe Member States - Report (rapporteur D. Marty), document AS/JUR/2006/16/Part II, of June 7, 2006, pp. 1-71. 65 . A term inadequately used with ominous consequences.