reasonableness, the adverse effect of the duration of the proceedings on the judicial situation of the person involved in it must be taken into account; bearing in mind, among other elements, the matter in dispute. If the passage of time has a relevant impact on the judicial situation of the individual, the proceedings should be carried out more promptly so that the case is decided as soon as possible” (para. 155). This progress in inter-American case law paves the way towards new modifications on an important issue that is submitted with increasing frequency. The high incidence of this issue in the cases submitted to the consideration of the European Court of Human Rights should also be recalled. II. The victim’s role in the proceedings 15. I am not referring here to the procedural activity of the victim in the international proceedings based on possible human rights violations, but rather to his participation or that of his representatives – the procedural legitimation – in the domestic proceedings to investigate the violations perpetrated, which lead to the identification of those responsible, the respective prosecution, and the corresponding judgment. The Inter-American Court has often dealt with this legitimation and has reminded the States of the pertinence, pursuant to the American Convention on Human Rights, of providing opportunities for the victim to intervene in the domestic proceedings leading to compliance with what has been called the “obligation to provide justice” – inherent in the State’s obligation to ensure the exercise of human rights (Article 1(1) of the American Convention) – which has special relevance as regards criminal justice, although it evidently includes, or may include, other types of justice (disciplinary, administrative or civil). 16. If we examine the Court’s case law on this matter, we will conclude that the victim’s participation, invoked by the Court, is based on the right of access to justice and to judicial protection (embodied in Article 8(1) of the Pact of San José) – a right that corresponds to everyone and, in particular, to those for whom a legally-protected interest or right to which they are entitled has been violated unfairly – in order to determine their rights, and also, if applicable, any obligations they may have. The procedural participation (lato sensu) of the victim (or his representatives) reflects the victim’s right to know the truth about what happened; that is, the conditions or characteristics of the violations perpetrated and the corresponding responsibilities, and these are the object of the domestic investigation. It also includes the victim’s right to reparation of the damage caused. In brief, the justification for the victim’s participation is threefold, and this has now been specifically included in the judgment in the case of Valle Jaramillo et al.: “access to justice, knowledge of the truth about what happened, and obtaining fair reparation” (para. 233). 17. This same examination of inter-American case law on the matter, allows us to see that the Court has understood that this participation by the victim – in other words, the scope of his legitimation – must be expanded and adapted to domestic law and international law. Evidently, domestic provisions must be compatible with the guiding principles of international human rights law, which the State has undertaken to comply with by means of an explicit sovereign decision, in the terms of Articles 1 and 2 of the American Convention. After all, we are dealing here with concentric circles of protection or concurrent elements in the establishment of a single procedural framework. 18. Nevertheless, in my opinion, our case law has not been sufficiently precise about the required content and characteristics of the victim’s procedural intervention. It must obviously be broad-ranging as I have mentioned, and not insignificant, symbolic, ineffective and illusory – a minimization resulting from an extreme version of the punitive powers of the State with its powers to exclude extended to all procedural acts – and must be subject to the domestic legal system and to international precepts. At times it has been understood