7 to preventing, punishing, and eradicating such violence. Within this framework, certain actions and abstentions that attend to those objectives are obligatory. These actions and abstentions have an evident correspondence with duties inherent to the acknowledgment, respect, and guarantee of the rights and liberties enshrined in the ACHR –for example, the provisions n Articles 5 and 8 of the same, and others--, with the adoption of norms that serve those purposes, and the suppression of measures and practices, of a diverse nature, that mean violence against women –provision related to Article 2 of the ACHR, among other precepts. 30. Therefore, the joint reading of the ACHR, with its catalogue of general rights and guarantees, and of the Convention of Belém do Pará, with its declaration of specific state duties, to which women’s rights correspond, results both natural and obligatory for the application of both. The second determines, illustrates or complements the content of the first in what refers to women’s rights that derive from the ACHR. That joint reading allows the integration of the panorama of the rights, and therefore, the profile of the violations to which the Inter-American Court has made reference in the Judgment of the Case of Castro Castro and assess their entity in the light of both instruments, the general one and the special one, as did the Court in this ruling, first in its gender issued by the Inter-American Tribunal in the exercise of its adjudicatory function. Said reading is consistent with the pro personae criteria that governs the interpretation in subjects of human rights –as has acknowledged the Court at all times—and it agrees with to the stipulation of Article 29 of the ACHR, especially subparagraph (b), which excludes any interpretation that may limit the rights and liberties acknowledged in conventions different than the ACHR and therefore promotes their inclusion within the framework of protection that must be provided by the bodies of the American Convention. 31. Article 12 of the Convention of Belém do Pará attributes to the Commission the knowledge of denunciations or complaints for violations to Article 7 of the same instrument. With this it opens the door for the presentation of individual petitions due to this concept, pursuant to the provisions of the ACHR and the Statute and Rules of Procedure of the Commission. It is reasonable –and consistent with the general protection system of human rights—to understand that the application of this legal codes governs all the extremes of the procedure followed before the Commission, which may be exhausted in this same instance or advance toward a second stage in the international protection, developed before the Court, when the Commission so determines it, it threatens the provisions of the ACHR (Articles 51 and 61(1), of its Statute (Article 23) and its Rules of Procedure (Articles 26 and following, especially 44). 32. In synthesis: the applicability and application of the Convention of Belém do Pará, with regard to its Article 7 and in the manner in which it has been done by the Inter-American Court in the Judgment of the Case of Castro Castro, is based on several considerations: a) the Inter-American System for the Protection of Human Rights operates based on a corpus juris in expansion, which seeks to cover the most ample protection of people, both through norms of an ordinary and general scope, as well as through provisions whose subjective validity includes specific human groups to which declarations or measures of protection indispensables for the effective enjoyment and exercise of their rights and liberties are destined; b) the attribution of powers to international bodies of protection –as well as to any deciding instances, of which the definition of rights and obligations depends—is not based on the simple will of the bodies called to exercise them, but on a normative framework sufficient that acts as the grounds of the public function, a