-7insertion of this provision in the 1948 American and Universal Declarations was the acknowledgement of the need to fill a gap in both declarations: to protect the rights of the individual against the abuses of the public authorities, to submit any abuse of individual rights to a decision of the Judiciary under domestic law.15 19. In brief, the original enshrinement of the right to an effective remedy before the competent national judges or courts in the American Declaration (Article XVIII) was transplanted to the Universal Declaration (Article 8) and, from this, to the European and American Conventions on Human Rights (Articles 13 and 25, respectively), and also to the United Nations Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Article 2(3)). Article 8 of the Universal Declaration and the corresponding provisions of human rights treaties in force, such as Article 25 of the American Convention, establish the State's obligation to provide adequate and effective domestic remedies. I have always maintained that this obligation should constitute a basic pillar not only of these treaties but of the rule of law itself in a democratic society, and its proper application is a means of optimizing the administration of justice (in substance and not only in form) at the national level. 20. This key provision is also closely bound to the general obligation of States (also embodied in the human rights treaties) to respect the rights enshrined in them, and to ensure their free and full exercise to all persons subject to their respective jurisdictions.16 It is also linked to the guarantees of due process of law (Article 8 of the American Convention),17 inasmuch as it ensures access to justice. Thus, by enshrining the right to an effective remedy before the competent national judges or tribunals, the guarantees of due process of law, and the general obligation to guarantee the protected rights, the American Convention (Articles 25, 8 and 1(1)), and other human rights treaties attribute protection functions to the domestic law of the States parties. 21. For the benefit of those protected, it is important that the corresponding developments in case law achieved by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights to date should be preserved and developed further in future - and never halted by a disaggregative interpretation. The relevance of the State's obligation to provide Direitos Humanos", 14 Anuario Hispano-Luso-Americano de Derecho Internacional (1999) pp. 197-238. 15 . Cf. A. Verdoodt, Naissance et signification de la Déclaration Universelle des Droits de l'Homme, Louvain, Nauwelaerts, [1963], pp. 116-119; A. Eide et alii, The Universal Declaration of Human Rights - A Commentary, Oslo, Scandinavian University Press, 1992, pp. 124-126 and 143-144; R. Cassin, "Quelques souvenirs sur la Déclaration Universelle de 1948", 15 Revue de droit contemporain (1968) No. 1, p. 10; R. Cassin, "La Déclaration Universelle et la mise en oeuvre des droits de l'homme", 79 Recueil des Cours de l'Académie de Droit International de La Haye (1951) pp. 328-329. 16 . American Convention on Human Rights, Article 1(1); European Convention on Human Rights, Article 1; United Nations Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 2(1). 17 . With regard to judicial protection and guarantees of due process of law under the American Convention, cf. A. A. Cançado Trindade, "The Right to a Fair Trial under the American Convention on Human Rights", in The Right to Fair Trial in International and Comparative Perspective (ed. A. Byrnes), Hong Kong, University of Hong Kong, 1997, pp. 4-11; A.A. Cançado Trindade, "Judicial Protection and Guarantees in the Recent Case-Law of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights", in Liber Amicorum in Memoriam of Judge J.M. Ruda, The Hague, Kluwer, 2000, pp. 527-535.