4 reliability of the international protection mechanism. In the instant case, to continue with a proceeding aimed at ensuring the protection of the interests of the alleged victims in the face of manifest violations of the procedural norms established by the Convention itself would result in a loss of the authority and credibility that are indispensable to organs charged with administering the system for the protection of human rights. In this respect the fact that non-compliance with basic requirements of time, place and form in the initial filing of applications has been, to date “a constant practice, not objected to by the Governments” does not indicate, from any point of view, that the actions have been legal, since error is not a source of law. For that reason it is not possible to proceed in a manner different from that required by the Convention and the Rules of Procedure of the Court, given that would be the equivalent of “gravely altering the balance and procedural equality of the parties.” This is precisely the “procedural injury” which provokes the respondent state, in this case, Guatemala. For the reasons expressed, I dissent from the judgment approved by the majority of the Honorable Judges, and I decide, consequently, that the preliminary objections raised by the State of Guatemala should be admitted, and the Court should declare that the application of January 19, 1995, was submitted by the Commission in an anomalous manner and after the period set forth in Article 51(1) of the Convention. San José, Costa Rica, January 25, 1996. Edgar Enrique Larraondo-Salguero Judge ad hoc Manuel E. Ventura-Robles Secretary