3 Internacional Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 2006.142 7. If we consider that there is only one form of forced disappearance, in the sense we are now discussing about, when the disappearance occurs in a context of systematic and massive violations of human rights, the consequence would be a concerning decrease in the level of international protection of a person, with the resulting lack of protection for the current or possible victims of such unlawful act. Any element included in the constitution of such disappearance would not be in line with the InterAmerican Convention and the concepts created in the last three decades, at the InterAmerican level as well as the international level; furthermore, it would leave millions of victims and possible victims unprotected. This is out reading of the judgment as the forced disappearance and the relation there is or could be between this and other facts of the past. 8. In light of the fact that the operative paragraphs of the judgment, with which we agree, refer to several paragraphs of the resolution, we deem it is appropriate to express our own point of view regarding the jurisdiction ratione temporis of the Court to hear certain aspects of this case, in view of the date on which the incidents occurred, as well as the moment in which the State, party to the American Convention, acknowledged the contentious jurisdiction of the Court and the way if expressed such acknowledgment, under the protection of Article 62 of that treaty. 9. The exercise of the contentious jurisdiction of the Court implies an important issue for the legal certainty in the Inter-American system of protection of human rights, for the benefit of the people that participates in that system and, more importantly, for the good performance of the justice administration. The exercise of such jurisdiction is associated with several legal acts, that may or may not coincide in time: on the one hand, the ratification of the American Convention (or the respective adherence); on otherwise deprived of their liberty by officials of different branches or levels of Government, or by organized groups or private individuals acting on behalf of, or with the support, direct or indirect, consent or acquiescence of the Government, followed by a refusal to disclose the fate or whereabouts of the persons concerned or a refusal to acknowledge the deprivation of their liberty, which places such persons outside the protection of the law”. 142 The Convention provides that forced disappearance is “…the arrest, detention, abduction or any other form of deprivation of liberty by agents of the State or by persons or groups of persons acting with the authorization, support or acquiescence of the State, followed by a refusal to acknowledge the deprivation of liberty or by concealment of the fate or whereabouts of the disappeared person, which place such a person outside the protection of the law”.