912/2010 6,” in which it described the specific obligations of the Mexican State and, in particular, of the Judiciary of the Federation, as a result of the issuance of the November 23, 2009 Judgment in the case of Radilla Pacheco v. Mexico, preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. In this judgment, the Supreme Court of Justice stated that the Judiciary was obligated to exercise, ex officio, control of conformity between domestic laws and the American Convention and that, to this end, it must take into account Article 1 of the Mexican Constitution, which, following the reform of July 10, 2011, establishes that “[l]aws relating to human rights shall be interpreted in accordance with [the] Constitution and with the international treaties on this matter, at all times giving preference to the greatest protection for the individual.” The aforementioned ruling further indicated that the decisions of the Inter-American Court with respect to Mexico and, in particular, the Judgment handed down in the case of Radilla Pacheco v. Mexico, referred to above, “are obligatory for all the organs [of the State] within their respective terms of reference […]. Therefore, not only the specific operative paragraphs of the Judgment, but also all the criteria contained in the Judgment deciding this litigation are binding for the Judiciary. Furthermore, it shall be considered that the rest of the case law of the Inter-American Court, arising from the judgments in which the Mexican State is not a party, provides guiding criteria for all the decisions of the Mexican judges, provided that these are the most favorable for the individual […].” 7 In addition, pursuant to this ruling, the Supreme Court of Justice also established that “the military justice system may not, under any circumstance, be used in situations that violate human rights of civilians,” because the latter have the right to “be subject to the jurisdiction of an ordinary court or tribunal.” 8 6. The Inter-American Court highlights that this Agreement of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation, issued in connection to the case of Radilla Pacheco, and which impacts the proper implementation of the decision in the case of Cabrera García and Montiel Flores regarding the limits of military jurisdiction, constitutes an important step forward in regards to the protection of human rights, not only within the framework of this case, but in all domestic spheres of the Mexican State. Consequently, this Court appreciates the considerations made by the highest court of the State, which are extremely significant for the enhancement of human rights in the region. A. Obligation to conduct an effective criminal investigation into the facts of this case, particularly into the alleged acts of torture committed against Messrs. Cabrera and Montiel, to determine the corresponding criminal liabilities and, if applicable, effectively apply the penalties and consequences established by law; also, to impose the appropriate disciplinary, administrative or criminal measures if the investigation into the aforementioned facts reveals procedural or investigative irregularities in relation thereto (twelfth operative paragraph of the Judgment) 6 In the private hearing held with Ministers on September 20, 2011, the bolded font of the file “Various 912/2010” was approved unanimously by 11 votes. Available at: http://fueromilitar.scjn.gob.mx/Resoluciones/Varios_912_2010.pdf. 7 Cf. Agreement of the full court of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation on July 14, 2011, Case file Varios 912/2010. Published in the Official Gazette of the Federation on October 4, 2011. 8 Cf. Agreement of the full court of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation on July 14, 2011, Case file Varios 912/2010. Published in the Official Gazette of the Federation on October 4, 2011. 4