13 committed to the realization of justice. It is, furthermore, an acknowledgement of the superiority of the judicial means of settlement of disputes, bearing witness of the prevalence of the rule of law in democratic societies, and discarding any surrender to State voluntarism. Since the visionary writings and ideas of Nicolas Politis and Jean Spiropoulos in Greece, Alejandro Álvarez in Chile, André Mandelstam in Russia, Raul Fernandes in Brazil, René Cassin and Georges Scelle in France, Hersch Lauterpacht in the United Kindgom, John Humphrey in Canada, among others, it was necessary to wait for decades for the current developments in the realization of international justice to take place, nowadays enriching rather than threatening international law, strengthening rather than undermining international law. The reassuring growth of international tribunals is a sign of our new times, and we have to live up to it, to make sure that each of them gives its contribution to the continuing evolution of international law in the pursuit of international justice" 27. 47. In the sphere of the protection of fundamental human rights, the growth and consolidation of the international human rights jurisdictions on the American and the European continent testify to the notable progress made by the ancient ideal of international justice today. Both the European and the Inter-American Court have correctly established limits to State voluntarism; they have safeguarded the integrity of their respective human rights conventions, and the primacy of considerations of ordre public over the will of individual States; they have set very high standards of State conduct and a certain degree of control over the imposing of undue restrictions by States; and it is encouraging to see that they have strengthened the position of the individual as a subject of international human rights law, with full procedural capacity. 48. With regard to the foundation of their contentious jurisdiction, eloquent illustrations of their firm stance in support of the integrity of the protection mechanisms of the two conventions are to be found in recent decisions of the European Court 28 and the Inter-American Court, for example. 29 Both international human rights tribunals, when correctly deciding basic procedural questions posed in recent cases, have appropriately used the mechanisms of public international law to strengthen their respective jurisdictions for the protection of the individual. 49. The Inter-American and the European Courts of Human Rights have thus decisively safeguarded the integrity of the mechanisms of protection of the American and European Conventions on Human Rights, which ensure the juridical emancipation of the individual vis-à-vis his own State. This is a significant jurisprudential construct which, in my opinion, does not allow any going back. Therefore, in my opinion, it is necessary to revert, as soon as possible, the unfortunate decision of the majority of the members of the Court in relation to the second operative paragraph of this judgment in the Serrano Cruz Sisters v. El 27 . A.A. Cançado Trindade, Speech on the Occasion of the Opening of the Judicial Year of the European Court of Human Rights (Thursday, 22 January 2004) / Discours dans l'audience solennelle à l'occasion de l'ouverture de l'année judiciaire de la Cour Européenne des Droits de l'Homme (le jeudi 22 janvier 2004), Strasbourg, Council of Europe/ECtHR doc. No. 926464, of January 22, 2004, p. 11, paras. 10-11. And cf. text also reproduced in European Court of Human Rights/Cour européenne des droits de l'homme, Annual Report 2003/Rapport annuel 2003, Strasbourg, C.E., 2004, p. 44, paras. 10-11. And cf. likewise, A.A. Cançado Trindade, "The Merits of Coordination of International Courts on Human Rights", 2 Journal of International Criminal Justice - Oxford (2004) pp. 309-312. 28 . In the Belilos versus Switzerland case (1988), in the Loizidou versus Turkey case (Preliminary Objections, 1995), and in the I. Ilascu, A. Lesco, A. Ivantoc and T. Petrov-Popa versus Moldovia and the Russian Federation case (2001). 29 . In the Constitutional Tribunal and Ivcher Bronstein vs Peru cases, Competence (1999), and in the Hilaire, Constantine and Benjamin et al. v. Trinidad and Tobago (Preliminary objections, 2001).