Interpretation. Since the Court abstained from doing so, I spread upon the record my own personal reasoning, in the present Concurring Opinion, as grounds to my position in this sense. X. The Blindness of Private Vengeance and the “Eye that Cries” Even More. 108. In my Concurring Opinion in the previous Judgment on merits and reparations (of 11.25.2006) in the present case of the Castro Castro Prison, I allowed myself to consider that "(...) From the debris of the bombing on the Prison of Castro Castro, from the devastation of the armed attack perpetrated against its defenseless inmates between the days of May 06 and 09, 1992, from the blood of its victims piled up one on top of the other, from the brutalities prolonged in time, from the damages caused to the inmates’ eyes by the splinters (fragmentation weapons) and the gases, - of this entire massacre without pity, arises the human conscience declared and symbolized today in the monument “The Eye that Cries,"86 in acknowledgment of the suffering of the victims and as an expression of solidarity to them. Solidarity and, through the present Judgment of this Court, justice, finally triumphed over criminal victimization. Today “The Eye that Cries” defies the passing of time, or intends to do so, as a sign of regret for the eyes that burned or were perforated in the Prison of Castro Castro, and as a lesson that everyone must persevere in the search of their own redemption. Given the finite nature of existential time, there are those that seek their improvement through the expressions of the spirit. In the present case, “The Eye that Cries” proves it. (...)" (paras. 19-20) 109. In the present Judgment of Interpretation, the Court referred to the monument “The Eye that Cries”, in the framework of a precision it makes with regard to a nonpecuniary measure of reparation in benefit of the victims and their next of kin in the cas d'espèce (para. 57). In the period of time that has gone by between the previous Judgment on merits and reparations, and the present Judgment of Interpretation in the case of the Castro Castro Prison, an incident that constitutes, in my opinion, a reason for great concern occurred. 110. It is this incident, more than the Court’s consideration, what I allow myself to refer to in the following considerations; since I consider that it should not go unnoticed. In my present Concurring Opinion, I already referred to the historical passing from the destructive cycle of private vengeance to the advent of public justice, with the corresponding primacy of Law over brute force, - made endless in the trilogy of tragedies of The Oresteia by Aeschylus, in ancient Greece (cf. supra). It seems that not even this passing has always happened in a lineal manner, but instead through steps forward and back, characteristic of the sad human condition. . To which the Court itself made reference in the mentioned Judgment (paras. 496497 and 506, and operative paragraph n. 15). 86 32