8 the broadest possible recognition of the Court on the part of all those who appear before it, as the most consolidated entity with continental scope that has been developed to safeguard human rights. Therefore, it is vital to continue with its consolidation and improvement, without subjecting it to risks that could negatively affect that effort. 18. However, the Court must act with such prudence bearing in mind that the raison d'être of the Convention44 is to ensure respect for human rights45 and, in particular, that the inter-American jurisdiction reinforces and complements the protection provided by the domestic laws of the American States.46 Thus, any decision adopted by the Court in exercise of its contentious jurisdiction must result in the most effective respect for human rights by the States, or in the prompt restoration of their effective exercise where these have been violated;47 and, any advisory opinion issued in exercise of its non-contentious or advisory role must effectively contribute, not obligate, those States or organs that request such counsel, to act according to the provisions of the Convention, so that they do not commit any international wrongful acts. 48 The Court’s task would be similar, then, to what occurs within the domestic sphere, for example with family, labor or environmental courts, which must protect the rights of children, workers or the inhabitants of protected areas, respectively, while acting with absolute impartiality in that regard. The Court must therefore reconcile the special interest that should prevail with the impartiality with which this must be put into practice. 19. That said, in accomplishing this task, the Court must specify the meaning and scope of its provisions which, because they are sometimes perceived as obscure or vague, present various options in terms of their application. In this order of ideas, it is appropriate to bear in mind that the interpretation of a treaty seeks to clarify any obscure or ambiguous aspects that it may contain, from which we may conclude that, if the provisions contained therein make sense, that will be the end of the matter.49 Therefore, the challenge of interpretation lies in ascertaining the will expressed by the Preamble to the Convention: “Reaffirming their intention to consolidate in this hemisphere, within the framework of democratic institutions, a system of personal liberty and social justice based on respect for the essential rights of man; Recognizing that the essential rights of man are not derived from one's being a national of a certain state, but are based upon attributes of the human personality, and that they therefore justify international protection in the form of a convention reinforcing or complementing the protection provided by the domestic law of the American States; Considering that these principles have been set forth in the Charter of the Organization of American States, in the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man, and in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and that they have been reaffirmed and refined in other international instruments, worldwide as well as regional in scope; Reiterating that, in accordance with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the ideal of free men enjoying freedom from fear and want can be achieved only if conditions are created whereby everyone may enjoy his economic, social, and cultural rights, as well as his civil and political rights; and Considering that the Third Special Inter-American Conference (Buenos Aires, 1967) approved the incorporation into the Charter of the Organization itself of broader standards with respect to economic, social, and educational rights and resolved that an inter-American convention on human rights should determine the structure, competence, and procedure of the organs responsible for these matters.” 44 45 Footnote 12. 46 Footnote 44. 47 Footnote 12. 48 Footnote 19. “The Court considers it necessary to say that the first duty of a tribunal which is called upon to interpret and apply the provisions of a treaty, is to endeavor to give effect to them in their natural and ordinary meaning in the context in which they occur. If the relevant words in their natural and ordinary meaning make sense in their context, and that is an end of the 49 matter.” International Court of Justice. “Advisory Opinion on the Competence of the General Assembly for the Admission of a State in the United Nations.” 1950. p. 8.