4 “Article VIII - Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law.” (Bold added by the author.) “Article X - Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.” 27. The American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man, also dating from 1948, includes similar terms in relation to access to justice and even clearer wording as regards the guarantee of promptness in the hearing of the dispute by the courts and by the public administration: “Article XVIII. Right to a fair trial. Every person may resort to the courts to ensure respect for his legal rights. There should likewise be available to him a simple, brief procedure whereby the courts will protect him from acts of authority that, to his prejudice, violate any fundamental constitutional rights.” (Bold added by the author.) “Article XXIV. Right of petition. Every person has the right to submit respectful petitions to any competent authority, for reasons of either general or private interest, and the right to obtain a prompt decision thereon.” (Bold added by the author.) 28. By indicating that the State’s omissions violate the rights of those subject to its jurisdiction, the Court seeks to implement the provisions of the American Convention on Human Rights (Pact of San José, Costa Rica), adopted by the Organization of American States (OAS) on November 22, 1969, which entered into force at the international level on July 18, 1978, in accordance with its Article 74(2). 29. In the case of Brazil, this important treaty came into force at the international level on September 25, 1992, when it deposited its instrument of adherence before the OAS, and at the domestic level on November 9, 1992, with the publication in the Official Gazette of the Union 4 of the Presidential Decree which made it an obligation erga omnes. 30. The following are the provisions of Articles 8 and 25 of the Convention: Article 8. Right to a Fair Trial 1. Every person has the right to a hearing, with due guarantees and within a reasonable time, by a competent, independent, and impartial tribunal, previously established by law, in the substantiation of any accusation of a criminal nature made against him or for the determination of his rights and obligations of a civil, labor, fiscal, or any other nature. [...]” (Bold added by the author.) Article 25. Right to Judicial Protection 1. Everyone has the right to simple and prompt recourse, or any other effective recourse, to a competent court or tribunal for protection against acts that violate his fundamental rights recognized by the constitution or laws of the state concerned or by this Convention, even though such violation may have been committed by persons acting in the course of their official duties. [...]” (Bold added by the author.) 31. The protection that international law provides for a prompt trial, within a reasonable time, is clear; based on the foregoing Brazil is evidently not complying with this. 32. The fact that, for a long time, the case law of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights has been very firm in this regard is extremely important. This can be seen from its first two judgments in this regard in 1997; the first of which was Genie Lacayo v. Nicaragua, of January 29, 1997. 33. Subsequently, but still the same year, the Court heard Suárez Rosero v. Ecuador during the first session presided by Judge Antônio Augusto Cançado Trindade who, with his 4 Official Gazette of the Union of 9/11/92, Section 1, p. 15,562/15,567.