11 general obligation-that is added to the specific obligations as to each of the protected rights- and the Court, as the judicial organ of supervision of the Convention, has the official duty to determine its fulfilment by the States Parties. The Respondent State can not, by means of a preliminary objection, attempt to negate this authority which is inherent to the jurisdiction of the Court. Therefore, the Court dismisses the fifth preliminary objection interposed by the State. IX 47. Now, therefore, THE COURT, DECIDES: by five votes to two 1. To dismiss the preliminary objections interposed by the State of Peru. Judges de Roux-Rengifo and Vidal-Ramírez Dissenting. By six votes to one 2. To proceed with the consideration of the merits of the case. Judge Vidal-Ramírez Dissenting. Judges de Roux-Rengifo and Vidal-Ramírez informed the Court of their Dissenting Opinions, both of which are attached hereto. Done in English and Spanish, the Spanish text being authentic, in San José, Costa Rica, on this third day of September, 1998. Hernán Salgado-Pesantes President Antônio A. Cançado Trindade Máximo Pacheco-Gómez Oliver Jackman Sergio García-Ramírez Carlos Vicente de Roux-Rengifo Fernando Vidal Ramírez So ordered, Manuel E. Ventura-Robles Secretary