CONCURRING OPINION OF JUDGE EDUARDO VIO GROSSI WITH THE ORDER OF THE INTER-AMERICAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS OF NOVEMBER 18, 2010, CASE OF BÁCAMA VELÁSQUEZ V. GUATEMALA, MONITORING COMPLIANCE WITH JUDGMENT With my vote I concur with the approval of the Order mentioned in the title (hereinafter “the Order”); however, I consider it convenient to add some comments on the aspects involved thereof, which I indicate below. 1.- The information set forth in section A) 1. of the Order1 is, in light of International Law and, therefore, for the Court, is nothing more than facts that prove that the State has not yet complied with the obligation to investigate the ordered by the Judgment in this case, which, is specifically evident in the grounds offered by the State when requesting that the Court “issue the corresponding ruling with regard to the order issued by (its) Constitutional Court,��� “to expand the criterion relating to the spirit of the” mentioned judgment of orders, “since with (its) ruling, the State of Guatemala is able to comply” with the latter.2 2.- It is important to state that, at present, according to the information found in the dossier,3 the domestic judicial act that definitively decreed the non-compliance with the Judgment of the present case, was a decision made by the Supreme Court of the State, although it must be stated that, with this, it complied with that ordered by the Constitutionality Court of the State in the processing an amparo recourse and thus appropriated the rulings of the Constitutionality Court. Therefore, currently, it is that decision that compromises the State’s international responsibility for said non-compliance and reference should therefore be made to Constitutionality Court’s decision in order to determine responsibility. 1 2 3 Paragraphs 9, 11, 12, and 13 of the Order. Paragraph 14 of the Order. Paragraph 13 of the Order.