51 214. In its final arguments, the State again emphasized that “[t]he basic intention of the Commission [was] to review the results of the Guatemalan judicial proceedings”; that, indeed, “[t]he expert witness Alberto Bovino [… had] criticized the application of Guatemalan domestic law in the proceedings conducted on the violent death of [the five youths]”; that, in reality, within the national Judiciary “there was a reasonable doubt about some of the evidence produced” and that one of the “characteristics of criminal law [... is] the rigor of the evidence, as it can lead to a limitation of the right to liberty”. 215. In these arguments, the State indicated that in Guatemala, as of 1996, “a whole process to create a new National Civil Police Force commenced [that …] will culminate in 2000”. It affirmed also that “a case of this nature [would] be very different in the light of the current situation”. In view of the foregoing, the State requested that “the application [should] be dismissed”. 216. Article 25 of the Convention establishes that 1. Everyone has the right to simple and prompt recourse, or any other effective recourse, to a competent court or tribunal for protection against acts that violate his fundamental rights recognized by the constitution or laws of the state concerned or by this Convention, even though such violation may have been committed by persons acting in the course of their official duties. 2. The States Parties undertake: a. to ensure that any person claiming such remedy shall have his rights determined by the competent authority provided for by the legal system of the state; b. to develop the possibilities of judicial remedy; and c. to ensure that the competent authorities shall enforce such remedies when granted. 217. And the relevant part of Article 8 of the Convention stipulates: 1. Every person has the right to a hearing, with due guarantees and within a reasonable time, by a competent, independent, and impartial tribunal, previously established by law, in the substantiation of any accusation of a criminal nature made against him or for the determination of his rights and obligations of a civil, labor, fiscal, or any other nature. [...] 218. Article 1(1) of the American Convention provides that The States Parties to this Convention undertake to respect the rights and freedoms recognized herein and to ensure to all persons subject to their jurisdiction the free and full exercise of those rights and freedoms, without any discrimination for reasons of race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, economic status, birth, or any other social condition. 219. Firstly, the Court observes that Article 62 of the American Convention grants it competence to hear any case submitted to its jurisdiction concerning the interpretation and application of the provisions of the Convention. Therefore, it is its function to resolve, as in this case, whether the alleged violations of Articles 25 and 8 of the American Convention, in relation to Article 1.1, have occurred.