6 28. Consequently, I consider it preferable be precise and classify each issue appropriately, so that it incorporates its responsibility. This responsibility may be attributed to a large group: from the most senior public officials to the individuals who carry out manifestly criminal orders or their own criminal acts, and they should not take refuge in the argument that the crime is not their crime, but rather that of the State. No official, however elevated his rank and determinant his authority, can concentrate in himself “the whole State” – irrespective of the historical examples of absolutism – and register his crimes to the latter’s account. 29. Indeed, when – as in the Case of Goiburú – it is possible to observe the criminal participation of officials of different States, collaborating and pursuing common illegal aims, through previously agreed activities, executed according to a common plan, would it be appropriate to refer to “States’ crimes”? This would dilute further still the criminal responsibility or would expand it extraordinarily, until it covered an indeterminate number of individuals who form part of the structure of several States, but who are unrelated to the execution of the criminal activities, and even have no knowledge of them. 30. These observations are in a similar spirit to those included in my separate opinion in the said Case of Myrna Mack Chang (para. 34). Sergio García-Ramírez Judge Pablo Saavedra-Alessandri Secretary