An assessment of the inter-American system ofprotection of human rights at the dawn of the new century may distinguish five stages of evolution: that of the antecedents of the system; that of the formation of the system (characterized by the solitary and central role of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and the progressive expansion of its powers); that of the conventional institutionalization of the system (as from the entry into force, in mid-1978, of the American Convention on Human Rights of 1969); that of the consolidation of the system (marked by the jurisprudential construction of the hzter-American Court of Human Rights, and by the adoption of the two additional Protocols to the American Conventions); and, at last, that of the necessary improvement of the system. The following recommendations are submitted to this effect de lege ferenda, to secure an improved functioning of the mechanisin of protection of the American Convention in all stages of the procedure.

The decisions of the Commission on admissibility ought to be pronounced in limine litis, and not reopened before the Court. The files of the cases lodged by the Commission with the Court ought to be carefully prepared, in a way that the Court does not need to reopen the fact-finding already undertaken by the Commission. Moreover, the Commission ought to conceive clear criteriaf or the renvoi of cases to the Court. The alleged victims (or their legal representatives) should have locus standi in judicio before the Court, as one cannot conceive rights without the legal capacity to vindicate them. Such locus standi is a guarantee of the equality of arms (fgalit6 des armes) and of the due process of law, which allows a better balance between the parties, the exercise of the freedom of expression as well as a better instruction of the cases, the transparency of the process to the benefit of all concerned, and it puts an end to the ambiguity of the current role of the Commission. Such a recognition of the jus standi of the individuals ought to contribute to the necessary '"ursidictionalization" of the procedure under the American Convention, besides crystallizing the international legal personality and capacity of individuals in the ambit of contemporary International Law of Human rights on the American continent.