6 defendant’s substantive and/or procedural rights, and the reflections that the Supreme Court of Argentina has revealingly and constructively expressed in its decisions. 26. The coordination of the continental system of human rights, in the defense of human rights, should be the result of a protective trend of dialogue combining the contributions of the international and national jurisdictions. The construction of a corpus juris and its applications are the product of collective thought, which, in turn, is the expression of convictions, values, principles, and shared work. They all converge to define and consolidate the definitions of common human rights culture. Hence, an international tribunal will more than welcome the reflections of a domestic court. 27. The international Law on human rights has brought about a new approach to certain rights that are some times associated with the great dogmas of the liberal movement that introduced precious reforms into the older criminal regulations, particularly from the 18th century onwards. I am not about to argue that the statute of limitations (a guarantee releasing the perpetrator of crime from the imposition of criminal liability) is necessarily one of those “new revised rights.” The statute of limitations – which reflects the dilemma between justice and certainty – can be traced to long times past. Whatever the case, under the most constant criminal regulations, it has become a defense for the defendant, and it is so categorized as one of the rights the defendant may assert against criminal prosecution by the State. 29. The protection of human rights against particularly serious, inadmissible violations that might go unpunished – thus diluting the duty to administer criminal justice stemming from the guarantee obligation of the State– has caused certain facts to be excluded from the ordinary statute of limitations system, even a more strict statute of limitations applied on certain conditions and longer terms intended to give extended life to the State’s right to prosecute. 30. However, such inapplicability of the statute of limitations to the criminal action (and, as the case may be, the power to enforce) should not extend to just any criminal case. The reduction or exclusion of rights and guarantees appear as extreme in the analysis of the appropriateness of maintaining certain traditional rights where the purpose is to provide, through such strict means, to the better protection of other rights and freedoms. Accordingly, the suppression of traditional rights must be exceptional in nature, rather than a regular or routine occurrence, and allowed precisely in connection with the most severe violations of human rights (considering the contemporary evolution of the international legal system: International human rights Law, international humanitarian Law, international criminal Law, with broad normative development and jurisdictional and scholarly analysis). 31. The significance or magnitude of such extremely serious violations is thus taken into consideration to justify the reduction of rights and guarantees that would ordinarily apply, as is the case with the statute of limitations. This does not lead to a dismissal or impairment of the importance of a specific fact, as the one sub judice at the national level in the instant case, but to an analysis of the appropriateness of the