DISSENTING OPINION OF JUDGE A. A. CANÇADO TRINDADE 1. In my understanding the representatives of the relatives of the victims in the El Amparo case, together with the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, are fully entitled, as the respondent State would also be, to request of the Court an interpretation or clarification of its Judgment on Reparations rendered on 14 September 1996. I regret not to find convincing elements to allow me, after a reexamination of the documents concerning the case, to concur with the majority of the Court, in its conclusion in the present Resolution to the effect that the provisions of Article 54(2) and (3) of the Code of Military Justice of Venezuela were not in fact applied in the El Amparo case, thus reiterating what was pointed out in paragraphs 57-58 of the aforementioned Judgment on Reparations. 2. The conclusion of the Court that those provisions of the Venezuelan military legislation were not applied in the cas d'espèce, in its view would, a fortiori, prevent it from proceeding to the determination of the incompatibility or otherwise of the aforementioned Article 54(2) and (3) of the Code of Military Justice with the American Convention on Human Rights. I reiterate my dissent from the majority of the Court in this respect. May I proceed to an explanation of the foundations of my dissenting position on the matter, as to the facts and as to the law. I. The Determination of the Facts. 3. As pointed out by the Court itself in the present Resolution, the Military Judge and Army Major Ricardo Pérez Gutiérrez acted indeed as judge of first instance in the El Amparo case (paragraph 2 of the consideranda). It is true, as the Court goes on to add, that, after the dismissal of that military judge and the annulment of his decisions, the process continued "in a normal way". But it is also true, as stated in the Commission's petition before the Court (of 15 January 1994, page 11), likewise recalled by the Court (same paragraph), that the Director of Human Rights of the Office of the Public Prosecutor of the Republic informed the lawyers of the survivors in the El Amparo case, on 16 February 1990, that the President of the Republic, "in his character of official of military justice", and "in accordance with the provision" of Article 54(2) of the Code of Military Justice, "ordered the non-initiation of any pretrial investigation" against Military Judge and Army Major Ricardo Pérez Gutiérrez. 4. In its reply (of 01 August 1994) to the Commission's petition, the respondent State affirmed, "in respect of the facts referred to in the petition (pages 2 to 11)", that "the Government of the Republic of Venezuela neither constests them nor does it express objections as to the merits" (page 3), reiterating that in the note of 11 January 1995. The Court, accordingly, in its Judgment as to the merits of 18 January 1995 in the present El Amparo case, given the recognition of responsibility