17 of criminal punishment through a gradual, irreversible process within States Parties to the American Convention. Thus, the decision of a State Party to the American Convention, at any time, to abolish the death penalty becomes, ipso jure, a final and irrevocable order. In this matter, the Convention points toward a gradual abolition, through the adoption of safeguards necessary for irrevocably restricting its application and scope over time until it is completely eliminated. 64. This abolitionist character is recognized in the Protocol to the American Convention on Human Rights to Abolish the Death Penalty 72 (hereinafter also “Protocol”), which notes in the considering paragraphs: That Article 4 of the American Convention on Human Rights recognizes the right to life and restricts the application of the death penalty; That everyone has the inalienable right to respect for his life, a right that cannot be suspended for any reason; That the tendency among the American States is to be in favor of abolition of the death penalty; That application of the death penalty has irrevocable consequences, forecloses the correction of judicial error, and precludes any possibility of changing or rehabilitating those convicted; That the abolition of the death penalty helps to ensure more effective protection of the right to life; That an international agreement must be arrived at that will entail a progressive development of the American Convention on Human Rights; and That States Parties to the American Convention on Human Rights have expressed their intention to adopt an international agreement with a view to consolidating the practice of not applying the death penalty in the Americas. 65. Furthermore, Article 1 establishes that “[t]he States Parties to this Protocol shall not apply the death penalty in their territory to any person subject to their jurisdiction,” and Article 2 declares that “[n]o reservations may be made to this Protocol. However, at the time of ratification or accession, the States Parties to this instrument may declare that they reserve the right to apply the death penalty in wartime in accordance with international law, for extremely serious crimes of a military nature.” 66. The Court notes that 1373 States have signed the Protocol to the American Convention on Human Rights to Abolish the Death Penalty and have accepted its jurisdiction and abolished the death penalty. The Court urges the remaining States to sign the Protocol and prohibit this type of criminal punishment. 67. In this sense, the American Convention is in harmony with the prevailing trend in the global human rights system. For example, United Nations General Assembly Resolution No. 62/149 on a moratorium of the use of the death penalty notes that the use of the death penalty undermines human dignity and that a moratorium on the use of the death penalty contributes to the gradual improvement and development of human rights. Moreover, it is noted that there is no conclusive evidence on the effectiveness of the death penalty as a deterrent and that any legal errors in its Cf. Protocol to the American Convention on Human Rights to Abolish the Death Penalty. Signatories and ratifications. Available at: http://www.oas.org/juridico/english/treaties/a-53.html 73 The 13 States in the inter-American system that have signed the Protocol to the American Convention on Human Rights to Abolish the Death Penalty are: Argentina, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Dominican Republic, Uruguay, Venezuela; and two have ratified the protocol with a reservation on the wartime application of the death penalty for serious crimes of a military nature: Brazil and Chile. Cf. Protocol to the American Convention on Human Rights to Abolish the Death Penalty, supra. 72