PARTIALLY DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE EDUARDO VIO GROSSI INTER-AMERICAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS CASE OF MANUELA ET AL. V. EL SALVADOR JUDGMENT OF NOVEMBER 2, 2021, (Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs) 1. This partially dissenting opinion with regard to the judgment in reference,1 is issued to explain why I have dissented from three of its operative paragraphs, as indicated below. 2. Evidently, and as in the case of the other separate opinions issued by the undersigned, this opinion is issued, on the one hand, with full respect for the InterAmerican Court of Human Rights2 and all its members and, on the other hand, in accordance with both the provisions that regulate the Court’s decisions,3 and also those relating to individual opinions,4 all of this in order to collaborate towards the fullest understanding of the decisions taken. 1 Hereinafter, the judgment. 2 Hereinafter, the Court. Article 16 of the Court’s Rules of Procedure: “1. The President shall present, point by point, the matters to be voted upon. Each Judge shall vote either in the affirmative or the negative; there shall be no abstentions. 2. The votes shall be cast in reverse order of precedence as established in Article 13 of the Statute. 3. The decisions of the Court shall be adopted by a majority of the Judges present at the time of the voting. 4. In the event of a tie, the President shall have a casting vote.” 3 Art. 32(1)(a) of the Court’s Rules of Procedure: ”The Court shall make public: its judgments, orders, opinions, and other decisions, including separate opinions, dissenting or concurring, whenever they fulfill the requirements set forth in Article 65(2) of these Rules.” Art. of the Convention: “If the judgment does not represent in whole or in part the unanimous opinion of the judges, any judge shall be entitled to have his dissenting or separate opinion attached to the judgment.” 4 Art. 24(3) of the Court’s Statute: “The decisions, judgments and opinions of the Court shall be delivered in public session, and the parties shall be given written notification thereof. In addition, the decisions, judgments and opinions shall be published, along with judges' individual votes and opinions and with such other data or background information that the Court may deem appropriate.” Art. 65(2) of the Court’s Rules of Procedure: “Any Judge who has taken part in the consideration of a case is entitled to append a separate reasoned opinion to the judgment, concurring or dissenting. These opinions shall be submitted within a time limit to be fixed by the President so that the other Judges may take cognizance thereof before notice of the judgment is served. Said opinions shall only refer to the issues covered in the judgment.” 1