7 point, but a finishing point to which the State’s efforts should be addressed. In the words of Rubio Llorente, the “Law attempts to be fair, and it is the idea of justice that leads directly to the principle of equality, which, in a way, constitutes its essential content.” Nevertheless, “equality is not a starting point, but rather a goal.” F) Participation and political rights 28. These objectives are not being achieved – nor, therefore, are equality and non-discrimination being protected – if the path of those who are struggling for political participation through the exercise of the respective rights, including the right to vote, is strewn with obstacles and unnecessary and disproportionate requirements. The requirement that participation is only through political parties, which today is being established as a natural fact in the democracies of the Americas, should accept the methods suggested by the traditional organization of the indigenous communities. In no way, is this an attempt to undermine the party system, but rather to protect the living conditions, work and organization of the indigenous communities, in the way and in terms that are reasonable and pertinent. The acceptance of these conditions and the respective methods of political participation are not transferred automatically to all mechanisms, nor do they extend beyond the territorial, social and temporal framework in which they are proposed and resolved. The Court decides what it considers admissible based on the circumstances before it. 29. This is the first time that the Court reflects on political rights, which are referred to in Article 23 of the Pact of San José, and which the Court has examined in connection with the other provisions of a broader scope: Articles 1(1), 2 and 24 of the same instrument. In the Court’s opinion – as I understand it – these rights should be considered in the circumstances in which their possessors have to assume them and exercise them. It is not possible, even now, to consider rights in abstract, as empty, neutral, colorless formulas provided to conduct the life of imaginary citizens, defined by texts and not by the strict reality. 30. In the instant case, the object is to promote the participation of people in managing their own lives, through political activities. Consequently, the form that this promotion should take must be considered, in keeping with the specific circumstances of those who are the possessors of rights, which should not be examined in abstract. To this end, it is necessary to remove determined obstacles, consider organizational alternatives, provide measures; in brief, “create circumstances” that allow certain individuals, in a specific characteristic situation, to achieve the objectives sought by human rights in the area of politics. To suppose that general declarations will be sufficient to facilitate the actions of people who are in distinct and distant conditions from those that the authors of these declarations had in mind, is to label illusion as reality. 31. The Court has not established, nor would it have to, the characteristics of a system of laws – and, in general, public action, which is more than general norms – favorable to the exercise of the political rights of members of indigenous communities, so that they are, truly, “as much citizens as the other citizens.” The State must examine the situation before it in order to establish the means to allow the exercise of the rights universally assigned by the American Convention, precisely in those situations. The fact that the rights are of a universal nature does not mean that the measures that should be adopted to ensure the exercise of the rights and freedoms has to be uniform, generic, the same, as if there were no differences,