24 another recent example, in a case on the rights of immigrants and refugees, the InterAmerican Court considered121 that: 129. In response to the special needs of protection for migrant persons and groups, this Court interprets and warrants substance to the rights recognized under the Convention, in accordance with the evolution of the international corpus juris applicable to the human rights of migrants.122 (…) 143. In accordance with Article 29(b) of the Convention, in order to interpret and apply the norms of the Convention specifically in order to determine the scope of State obligations in 123 relation to the facts of this case, the Court takes into account the important evolution of the regulations and principles of International Refugee Law, also established in the guidelines, 124 standards and other authorized decisions of bodies such as the UNHCR. In this sense, although the obligations contained in Articles 1(1) and 2 of the Convention constitute the basis 125 for determining a State's international responsibility for violations thereof, the Convention itself expressly refers to the rules of general International Law for its interpretation and 126 application. Thus, upon determining the compatibility of the actions and omissions of the 121 Case of Pacheco Tineo Family V. Plurinational State of Bolivia. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of November 25, 2013. Series C No. 272, paras. 129 and 143. 122 Cf.Juridical Condition and Rights of the Undocumented Migrant. Advisory Opinion OC-18/03 of September 17, 2003. Series to No. 18, para. 117, citing United Nations, Report of the World Summit for Social Development held in Copenhagen, 6 to 12 of March, 1995, A/CONF.166/9, of April 19, 1995,Annex II Program of Action, paras. 63, 77 and 78, available at:http://www.inclusion-ia.org/espa%F1ol/Norm/copspanish.pdf; United Nations, Report of the International Conference on Population and Development held in Cairo on September 5 to 13, 1994, A/CONF.171/13, of October 18, 1994, Program of Action, Chapter X.A. 10. 2 to 10.20, available at: http://www.un.org/popin/icpd/conference/offspa/sconf13.html, and United Nations, General Assembly, World Conference on Human Rights held Vienna, Austria, from June 14 to 25, 1993, A/CONF. 157/23, from July 12, 1993, Declaration and Program of Action, I.24 and II.33-35, available at: http://www.cinu.org.mx/temas/dh/decvienapaccion.pdf. 123 Cf. Mutatis mutandi, Case of Santo Domingo Massacre V. Colombia. Preliminary Objections, Merits and Reparations. Judgment of November 30, 2012. Series C No. 259, para. 255; and mutatis mutandi Case of Atala Riffo and Girls V. Chile. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of February 24, 2012. Series C No. 239, para. 83. 124 The States Parties to the Convention of 1951 and the Protocol of 1967 have conferred monitoring of compliance to the UNHCR, established in the Preamble itself of the Convention (para. 6th), to promote and assure compliance of the principle legal instruments of the protection of refugees. Cf. Executive Committee of the Program of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, Note on International Protection, 51st period of sessions, July 7, 2000, A/AC.96/930, available at: http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/docid/3ae68d6c4.html, para. 20. This function coexists with the corresponding obligation of the States to cooperate with the UNHCR in the exercise of this function, pursuant to Article 35 of the Convention of 1951, Article II of Protocol of 1967 and paragraph 8 of the Statute of the Office of the UNHCR. Moreover, in relation to the Manual of Procedures and Standards to Determine Refugee Status of the UNHCR, the expert witness Juan Carlos Murillo stated that “in 1978 when the Manual was adopted [...] it was drafted because the UNHCR Executive Committee in 1977 called the office to assist States in the interpretation of the provisions of the 1951 Convention. As such, it is an interpretive guide of a non-binding nature. However, in the UNHCR's history, after more than sixty years overseeing the implementation of the Convention and the Protocol on the Status of Refugees, many countries, including many of the Latin American countries have included specific reference to the Manual as an interpretive guide, that is, that it has sufficient authority to serve as interpretative guidance to the States. and therefore although it is not binding, many countries have fully incorporated it into their domestic legislation each time they have to determine refugee status." Cf. Expert statement rendered by Juan Carlos Murillo before the Inter-American Court in public hearing held on june 20, 2012. 125 Case of the Mapiripan Massacre V. Colombia. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of September 15, 2005. Series C No. 134, para. 107. 126 In this sense, the preamble itself of the American Convention refers expressly to the principles reaffirmed and developed in international instruments, “both in the universal as well as regional sphere” (para. 3) and Article 29 requires its interpretation heeding to the American Declaration “and other international acts of the same