10 individual petitioners before the international tribunals of human rights?” (para 23). And I concluded: “In fact, the assertion of those juridical personality and capacity constitutes the truly revolutionary legacy of the evolution of the international legal doctrine in the second half of the 20th century. (...) An important role is here being exercised by the impact of the proclamation of human rights in the international legal order, in the sense of humanizing the latter: those rights were proclaimed as inherent to every human being, irrespectively of any circumstances.30 The individual is subject jure suo of International Law, and to the recognition of the rights that are inherent to him corresponds ineluctably the procedural capacity to vindicate them, at national as well as international levels.” (para. 24). 32. By exercising this procedural capacity, the individual today activates the mechanism for implementation of the international responsibility of the State for human rights violations. The individual petitioner today is able, as shown en the instant case of the Gómez Paquiyauri brothers, of –correctly- stating his or her understanding of the origin of State responsibility, for its subsequent international implementation. The instant adjudicatory proceeding has clearly demonstrated that full participation of the individuals –the victim or the victim’s next of kin and their legal representatives- in said proceeding before the Court contributes effectively to better conduct the proceeding,31 both regarding factual and legal aspects.32 33. The individuals not only take the initiative of triggering implementation of the international responsibility of the State that committed the violation, but also express their understanding of the very basis for said international responsibility. Individuals thus contribute to evolution and humanization of international law, both with respect to conventions and general law. They are not only subjects of international law,33 but also participants in the process of its constitution and evolution. This is a feature of the new jus gentium, at the start of the 21st century. 34. Consideration of the case of the Gómez Paquiyauri Brothers should not disregard a final, equally significant aspect that I must record in this Separate Opinion. Even though they happened 13 years ago, in mid-1991, the facts in the instant case are still indelibly engraved, with the branding mark of human brutality, in the memory of the next of kin of the victims. In her testimony before this Court, the sister of the two murdered boys said that she “loved [her] brothers,” that “not a day passes in [her] life that [she] does not remember them, not a day in [her] life that they are not present” in her memory (see supra). 35. The image of the cruelty that surrounded the murder of the brothers Rafael and Emilio Gómez Paquiyauri, of their mangled remains and their decomposing 30 . I-A Ct of HR, Advisory Opinion OC-17/02, on the Juridical Condition and Human Rights of the Child, of 28.08.2002, operative paragraph n. 1, and Concurring Opinion of Judge A.A. Cançado Trindade, paras. 1-71. 31 . In addition to ensuring their right to freedom of expression in the course of the international proceeding. 32 . See, in this regard, A.A. Cançado Trindade, "Vers la consolidation de la capacité juridique internationale des pétitionnaires dans le système interaméricain des droits de la personne", 14 Revue québécoise de droit international (2001) pp. 207-239, esp. pp. 223-224; and see A.A. Cançado Trindade, "Le système inter-américain de protection des droits de l'homme: état actuel et perspectives d'évolution à l'aube du XXIème siècle", 46 Annuaire français de Droit international - Paris (2000) pp. 570-577. 33 . Even for purposes of directly receiving reimbursement for the legal costs of the international proceeding, as in the instant case.