2. Argentina has been a State Party to the American Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter “the American Convention” or “the Convention”) since September 5, 1984, and accepted the contentious jurisdiction of the Court the same day, pursuant to Article 62 of this treaty. 3. According to Article 67 of the American Convention, the State must comply promptly and fully with the judgments of the Court. Also, Article 68(1) of the American Convention stipulates that: “[t]he States Parties to the Convention undertake to comply with the judgment of the Court in any case to which they are parties.” Therefore, the States must ensure implementation at the domestic level of the Court’s decisions in its judgments. 1 4. The obligation to comply with the decisions in the Court’s judgments corresponds to a basic principle of international law, supported by international case law, according to which, States must comply with their international treaty obligations in good faith (pacta sunt servanda) and, as this Court has already indicated and as established in Article 27 of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, a party may not invoke the provisions of its internal law as justification for its failure to perform a treaty. 2 The treaty obligations of the States Parties are binding for all the powers and organs of the State. 3 5. In 2008, the General Assembly of the Organization of American States (hereinafter “the OAS”) created the Legal Assistance Fund of the Inter-American Human Rights System (hereinafter “Assistance Fund of the Inter-American System”) and commissioned the OAS Permanent Council to draw up the corresponding regulations. 4 This Assistance Fund was created in order to “facilitate access to the inter-American human rights system by persons who currently lack the resources needed to bring their cases before the system.” 5 According to the provisions of the Rules of Procedure adopted by the OAS Permanent Council in November 2009, the Assistance Fund of the Inter-American System has two separate accounts: one corresponding to the Inter-American Commission and the other to the InterAmerican Court. 6 The financing of the Assistance Fund of the Inter-American System, depends on “[v]oluntary capital contributions from the Member States of the OAS, the permanent observer States, and other States and donors that may wish to collaborate with the Fund.” 7 Also, according to article 4 of the Rules of Procedure approved by the Permanent Council, it is for the Court to regulate the eligibility requirements in order to request assistance, as well as the procedure for the approval of this assistance. 1 Cf. Case of Baena Ricardo et al. Competence. Judgment of November 28, 2003. Series C No. 104, para. 60, and Case of Abrill Alosilla et al. v. Peru. Monitoring compliance with judgment. Order of the Court of May 22, 2013, third considering paragraph. 2 Cf. International Responsibility for the Promulgation an Enforcement of Laws in Violation of the Convention (Arts. 1 and 2 American Convention on Human Rights). Advisory Opinion OC-14/94 of December 9, 1994. Series A No. 14, para. 35, and Case of Abrill Alosilla et al. v. Peru. Monitoring compliance with judgment. Order of the Court of May 22, 2013, fourth considering paragraph. 3 Cf. Case of Castillo Petruzzi et al. v. Peru. Monitoring compliance with judgment. Order of the Court of November 17, 1999, third considering paragraph, and Case of Abrill Alosilla et al. v. Peru. Monitoring compliance with judgment. Order of the Court of May 22, 2013, fourth considering paragraph. 4 Cf. AG/RES. 2426 (XXXVIII-O/08), Resolution adopted by the thirty-eighth General Assembly of the OAS, during the fourth plenary session, held on June 3, 2008, “Creation of the Legal Assistance Fund of the InterAmerican Human Rights System,” operative paragraph 2(b). 5 AG/RES. 2426 (XXXVIII-O/08), supra, operative paragraph 2(a), and CP/RES. 963 (1728/09), Resolution adopted by the OAS Permanent Council on November 11, 2009, “Rules of Procedure for the Legal Assistance Fund of the Inter-American Human Rights System,” article 1(1). 6 Cf. Resolution CP/RES. 963 (1728/09), supra, article 3(1). 7 Cf. Resolution CP/RES. 963 (1728/09), supra, article 2(1). 2