3 12. Based on these considerations, the Court has expressed its concern as regards an evident lack of proportionality; a concept that should always be respected when a right is restricted or impaired, or when a decision is rendered to punish a violation committed under a legal provision or in the exercise of jurisdictional powers. Thus, the court in charge of controlling compliance does not act as domestic trial or legislating authority, but rather evaluates their performance in accordance with the Convention, even when its analysis consists merely in assessing and not in defining specific measures -which must be established by the State, - particularly if limitations apply as a result of the recognition of the jurisdiction of the Court, as in the instant case. 13. Therefore, upon analyzing these considerations, the Inter-American Court may reasonably raise questions to address the subject in the domestic jurisdiction; even though the Court may focus its own examination on the drafting of these questions and make no effort to find answers, which would ultimately call for a judgment of conviction that the international Court is not empowered to render. 14. For instance, consider the extra-legal execution of a 16-year old child who attempted to flee from the military post to which he had been assigned. Can it be classified -as held by the military justice- as a consequence of excessive diligence in the performance of duties; i.e. excess as a ground to void the illegal nature of the act or to limit liability? The first case probably applies if an excess is associated with an alleged breach of duty. Can said act be subject to an evidently favorable punishment, even tough it involved the death of a child, a harmless person who was running ahead of this executor and could have been stopped by resorting to other intimidation measures? Moreover, is it appropriate to classify said execution, as held by the ordinary courts, as “wrongful homicide”; i.e. a non-intentional act, even though the conduct displayed by the military officer could result in the death of the individual; a foreseeable and avoidable possibility, apparently accepted by the perpetrator? 15. Notwithstanding the fact that the act matches the crime definition –as it was classified as an illegal act both in the military and civil jurisdictions, - the question would be if it was reasonable to impose an evidently favorable punishment (1 to 5year imprisonment) based on the punishment scheme established by criminal law, despite the nature of the act committed, the age of the victim, his defenseless, harmless and vulnerable status. 16. It could be held that those responsible for analyzing these issues from a human rights perspective do not have a duty to foster strict compliance with crime definitions, severe punishment or the strengthening of the penalties imposed pursuant to the law. However, those individuals do have a duty to verify that the guarantee to respect human rights satisfies the proportionality rule, preventing it from falling into illusory measures that fail to effectively honor the quest for justice. If we admit the foregoing, setting crime definitions, determining possible punishments and procedural requirements, together with the decisions contained in judgments, become a key issue to be taken into account to effectively protect human rights.