Superintendence (ANCEJUB-SUNAT) v. Peru, 6 Hernández v. Argentina, 7 Indigenous Communities of the Lhaka Honhat (Our Land) Association v. Argentina, 8 Guachalá Chimbo et al. v. Ecuador; 9 as well as in my concurring opinions in the cases of: Gonzales Lluy et al. v. Ecuador 10, Poblete Vilches et al. v. Chile 11, Casa Nina v. Peru 12, Miskito Divers v. Honduras, 13 Vera Rojas et al. v. Chile 14, Manuela et al. v. El Salvador, 15 and the case of the Former Employees of the Judiciary v. Guatemala, 16 in relation to the justiciability of the economic, social, cultural and environmental rights (hereinafter “ESCER”) through Article 26 of the American Convention on Human Rights (hereinafter “the Convention” or “ACHR).” 2. In previous separate opinions, I have presented in detail numerous arguments that demonstrate the logical and legal contradictions and inconsistencies in the theory of the direct and autonomous justiciability of ESCER. I have pointed out that Article 26 of the Convention contains the obligation of progressive development and its consequent duty of non-regression in relation to the rights that may derive from the OAS Charter. Thus, by virtue of this provision, the Court can declare the international responsibility of the State for non-compliance with the obligations of progressive development and nonretrogression, not of the ESCER in their individual dimension. Cf. Case of the National Association of Discharged and Retired Employees of the National Tax Administration Superintendence (ANCEJUB-SUNAT) v. Peru. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 21, 2019. Series C No. 394. Partially dissenting opinion of Judge Humberto Antonio Sierra Porto. 6 7 Cf. Case of Hernández v. Argentina. Preliminary objection, Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 22, 2019. Series C No. 395. Partially dissenting opinion of Judge Humberto Antonio Sierra Porto. Cf. Case of Indigenous Communities of the Lhaka Honhat (Our Land) Association v. Argentina. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of February 6, 2020. Series C No. 400. Partially dissenting opinion of Judge Humberto Antonio Sierra Porto. 8 Cf. Case of Guachalá Chimbo et al. v. Ecuador. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of March 26, 2021. Series C No. 423. Partially dissenting opinion of Judge Humberto Antonio Sierra Porto. 9 Cf. Case of Gonzales Lluy et al. v. Ecuador. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of September 1, 2015. Series C No. 298. Concurring opinion of Judge Humberto Antonio Sierra Porto. 10 Cf. Case of Poblete Vilches et al. v. Chile. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of March 8, 2018. Series C No. 349. Concurring opinion of Judge Humberto Antonio Sierra Porto. 11 Cf. Case of Casa Nina v. Peru. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 24, 2020. Series C No. 419. Partially dissenting opinion of Judge Humberto Antonio Sierra Porto. 12 Cf. Case of the Miskito Divers (Lemoth Morris et al.) v. Honduras. Judgment of August 31, 2021. Series C No. 432. 13 Cf. Case of Vera Rojas et al. v. Chile. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of October 1, 2021. Series C No. 439. 14 Cf. Case of Manuela et al. v. El Salvador. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 2, 2021. Series C No. 441. 15 Cf. Case of Former Employees of the Judiciary v. Guatemala. Preliminary objections, merits and reparations. Judgment of November 17, 2021. Series C No. 445. 16 2