16. Time limits, such as the one under consideration here, are only peremptory and nonextendible to act, to answer and to have access into the procedural relationship as a party, correctly established in the Court’s Rules of Procedure, Article 36 (autonomous access of the victims or their representatives) and Article 38 (answer by the State). 17. The calculation of the time limit is another issue and has rules that have been accepted universally for centuries. It is subject to rules that go back to the origins of the Latin legal aphorisms (brocardos) (at least to classical Roman law, which began in the first century of the Christian era). Subsequently, in the eleventh century during Medieval times, these aphorisms were compiled, 5 and have survived the passage of time and remain strong and vigorous as rules that have duly passed the test of time. 18. Maxims and time-honored phrases, such as those that follow, which constitute legal norms under diverse legal systems derive from them: a) dies a quo non computatur in termino (the initial day is not calculated as part of the time period); b) dies ad quem computatur in termino (the last day is calculated in the period); c) dies dominicus non est juridicus 6 (Sunday is not a court day); d) dies non (abbreviation of dies non juridicus) 7 (non-working or not a court day) e) dies feriati 8 (holidays) f) dies utiles 9 (working day). 19. We can easily conclude, based on the sequence of the ancient aphorisms transcribed above, that this type of calculation, which is made in these proceedings, is customary, universally accepted and used. Moreover, in defense of the legal certainty that this Court so often urges, this tradition should be followed; even because, as we have noted, the expression “that may not be extended” is directed at the judge and at the parties, and not at the way the time limit is calculated. 20. It is also important to note that the domestic law of several countries worldwide contains normative rules for calculating judicial time limits that incorporate the Latin aphorisms, even as regards establishing that if the day of expiry of a time limit occurs on a non-working day, it must be transferred to the following working day by fluid, logical, consequent natural law. 21. The fact is that those ancient aphorisms wound up incorporating authentic procedural principles for calculating time limits, which have extended to universal common rules inspired today by Italian procedural law, the reference for most national procedural codes. As an example of the said actuality, it is sufficient to recall the 1940 “Codice di Procedura Civile” (Italian Code of Civil Procedure) in force today, in its extremely clear Article 155: Art. 155. (Computo dei termini) Nel computo dei termini a giorni o ad ore, si escludono il giorno o l’ora iniziali. 5 The word “axiom” is not Latin. It results from the latinization of the name of the jurist Burchard (or Burckard), Bishop of Worms, Germany, from the year 1000 to 1025, who compiled 20 volumes of the Regulae Ecclesiasticae (ecclesiastic rules) which included maxims and axioms, subsequently called “brocardos” (aphorisms). The term was adopted definitively as of 1508 when the book of juridical maxims “Brocardia Juris” was published in Paris. 6 BLACK, Henry Campbell. Black’s law dictionary; centennial edition (1891-1991). 6th ed., actual. By the Publisher’s Editorial Staff, co-authors Joseph R. Nolan et alii. St. Paul: West Publishing Co., 1990. p. 455. According to this dictionary under the entry “[d]ies dominicus non est juridicus. Sunday is not a court day, or day for judicial proceedings, or legal purposes.” 7 Ibid. Entry “dies non juridicus. A non-juridical day; not a court day. A day on which courts are not open for business, such as Sundays and some holidays.” 8 9 Ibid. Entry “dies feriati. In civil law, holidays.” Ibid., pp. 455/456. Entry “dies utiles. Juridical days; useful or available days. A term of the Roman law, used to designate special days occurring within the limits of a prescribed period of time upon which it was lawful, or possible, to do a specific act.”